Dataset Information

The association between physician turnover (the "July Effect") and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest.

ABSTRACT: The July Effect refers to adverse outcomes that occur as a result of turnover of the physician workforce in teaching hospitals during the month of June.As a surrogate for physician turnover, we used a multivariable difference-in-difference approach to determine if there was a difference in outcomes between May and July in teaching versus non-teaching hospitals.We used prospectively collected observational data from United States hospitals participating in the Get With The Guidelines®-Resuscitation registry. Participants were adults with index in-hospital cardiac arrest between 2005-2014. They were a priori divided by location of arrest (general medical/surgical ward, intensive care unit, emergency department). The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included neurological outcome at discharge, return of spontaneous circulation, and several process measures.We analyzed 16,328 patients in intensive care units, 11,275 in general medical/surgical wards and 3790 in emergency departments. Patient characteristics were similar between May and July in both teaching and non-teaching hospitals. The models for intensive care unit patients indicated the presence of a July Effect with the difference-in-difference ranging between 1.9-3.1%, which reached statistical significance (p<0.05) in all but one model (p=0.07). Visual inspection of monthly survival curves did not show a discernible trend, and no July Effect was observed for return of spontaneous circulation, neurological outcome or process measures except for airway confirmation in the intensive care unit. We found no July Effect for survival in emergency departments or general medical/surgical wards (p>0.20 for all models).There may be a July Effect in the intensive care unit but the results were mixed. Most survival models showed a statistically significant difference but this was not supported by the secondary analyses of return of spontaneous circulation and neurological outcome. We found no July Effect in the emergency department or the medical/surgical ward for patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest.

SUBMITTER: Myers L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6039816 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The association between physician turnover (the "July Effect") and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest.

Myers Laura L Mikhael Bassem B Currier Paul P Berg Katherine K Jena Anupam A Donnino Michael M Andersen Lars W LW

Resuscitation 20170308

<h4>Importance</h4>The July Effect refers to adverse outcomes that occur as a result of turnover of the physician workforce in teaching hospitals during the month of June.<h4>Objective</h4>As a surrogate for physician turnover, we used a multivariable difference-in-difference approach to determine if there was a difference in outcomes between May and July in teaching versus non-teaching hospitals.<h4>Design</h4>We used prospectively collected observational data from United States hospitals parti ...[more]

PMID: 28285032

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceTherapeutic hypothermia is used for patients following both out-of-hospital and in-hospital cardiac arrest. However, randomized trials on its efficacy for the in-hospital setting do not exist, and comparative effectiveness data are limited.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between therapeutic hypothermia and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest.Design, setting, and patientsIn this cohort study, within the national Get With the Guidelines-Resuscitation registry, 26 183 patients successfully resuscitated from an in-hospital cardiac arrest between March 1, 2002, and December 31, 2014, and either treated or not treated with hypothermia at 355 US hospitals were identified. Follow-up ended February 4, 2015.ExposureInduction of therapeutic hypothermia.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. The secondary outcome was favorable neurological survival, defined as a Cerebral Performance Category score of 1 or 2 (ie, without severe neurological disability). Comparisons were performed using a matched propensity score analysis and examined for all cardiac arrests and separately for nonshockable (asystole and pulseless electrical activity) and shockable (ventricular fibrillation and pulseless ventricular tachycardia) cardiac arrests.ResultsOverall, 1568 of 26 183 patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest (6.0%) were treated with therapeutic hypothermia; 1524 of these patients (mean [SD] age, 61.6 [16.2] years; 58.5% male) were matched by propensity score to 3714 non-hypothermia-treated patients (mean [SD] age, 62.2 [17.5] years; 57.1% male). After adjustment, therapeutic hypothermia was associated with lower in-hospital survival (27.4% vs 29.2%; relative risk [RR], 0.88 [95% CI, 0.80 to 0.97]; risk difference, -3.6% [95% CI, -6.3% to -0.9%]; P = .01), and this association was similar (interaction P = .74) for nonshockable cardiac arrest rhythms (22.2% vs 24.5%; RR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.76 to 0.99]; risk difference, -3.2% [95% CI, -6.2% to -0.3%]) and shockable cardiac arrest rhythms (41.3% vs 44.1%; RR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.05]; risk difference, -4.6% [95% CI, -10.9% to 1.7%]). Therapeutic hypothermia was also associated with lower rates of favorable neurological survival for the overall cohort (hypothermia-treated group, 17.0% [246 of 1443 patients]; non-hypothermia-treated group, 20.5% [725 of 3529 patients]; RR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.69 to 0.90]; risk difference, -4.4% [95% CI, -6.8% to -2.0%]; P < .001) and for both rhythm types (interaction P = .88).Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest, use of therapeutic hypothermia compared with usual care was associated with a lower likelihood of survival to hospital discharge and a lower likelihood of favorable neurological survival. These observational findings warrant a randomized clinical trial to assess efficacy of therapeutic hypothermia for in-hospital cardiac arrest.

Project description:ImportanceTracheal intubation is common during pediatric in-hospital cardiac arrest, although the relationship between intubation during cardiac arrest and outcomes is unknown.ObjectiveTo determine if intubation during pediatric in-hospital cardiac arrest is associated with improved outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsObservational study of data from United States hospitals in the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry. Pediatric patients (<18 years) with index in-hospital cardiac arrest between January 2000 and December 2014 were included. Patients who were receiving assisted ventilation, had an invasive airway in place, or both at the time chest compressions were initiated were excluded.ExposuresTracheal intubation during cardiac arrest .Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included return of spontaneous circulation and neurologic outcome. A favorable neurologic outcome was defined as a score of 1 to 2 on the pediatric cerebral performance category score. Patients being intubated at any given minute were matched with patients at risk of being intubated within the same minute (ie, still receiving resuscitation) based on a time-dependent propensity score calculated from multiple patient, event, and hospital characteristics.ResultsThe study included 2294 patients; 1308 (57%) were male, and all age groups were represented (median age, 7 months [25th-75th percentiles, 21 days, 4 years]). Of the 2294 included patients, 1555 (68%) were intubated during the cardiac arrest. In the propensity score-matched cohort (n = 2270), survival was lower in those intubated compared with those not intubated (411/1135 [36%] vs 460/1135 [41%]; risk ratio [RR], 0.89 [95% CI, 0.81-0.99]; P = .03). There was no significant difference in return of spontaneous circulation (770/1135 [68%] vs 771/1135 [68%]; RR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.95-1.06]; P = .96) or favorable neurologic outcome (185/987 [19%] vs 211/983 [21%]; RR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.75-1.02]; P = .08) between those intubated and not intubated. The association between intubation and decreased survival was observed in the majority of the sensitivity and subgroup analyses, including when accounting for missing data and in a subgroup of patients with a pulse at the beginning of the event.Conclusions and relevanceAmong pediatric patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest, tracheal intubation during cardiac arrest compared with no intubation was associated with decreased survival to hospital discharge. Although the study design does not eliminate the potential for confounding, these findings do not support the current emphasis on early tracheal intubation for pediatric in-hospital cardiac arrest.

Project description:ImportanceTracheal intubation is common during adult in-hospital cardiac arrest, but little is known about the association between tracheal intubation and survival in this setting.ObjectiveTo determine whether tracheal intubation during adult in-hospital cardiac arrest is associated with survival to hospital discharge.Design, setting, and participantsObservational cohort study of adult patients who had an in-hospital cardiac arrest from January 2000 through December 2014 included in the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry, a US-based multicenter registry of in-hospital cardiac arrest. Patients who had an invasive airway in place at the time of cardiac arrest were excluded. Patients intubated at any given minute (from 0-15 minutes) were matched with patients at risk of being intubated within the same minute (ie, still receiving resuscitation) based on a time-dependent propensity score calculated from multiple patient, event, and hospital characteristics.ExposureTracheal intubation during cardiac arrest.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and a good functional outcome. A cerebral performance category score of 1 (mild or no neurological deficit) or 2 (moderate cerebral disability) was considered a good functional outcome.ResultsThe propensity-matched cohort was selected from 108 079 adult patients at 668 hospitals. The median age was 69 years (interquartile range, 58-79 years), 45 073 patients (42%) were female, and 24 256 patients (22.4%) survived to hospital discharge. Of 71 615 patients (66.3%) who were intubated within the first 15 minutes, 43 314 (60.5%) were matched to a patient not intubated in the same minute. Survival was lower among patients who were intubated compared with those not intubated: 7052 of 43 314 (16.3%) vs 8407 of 43 314 (19.4%), respectively (risk ratio [RR] = 0.84; 95% CI, 0.81-0.87; P < .001). The proportion of patients with ROSC was lower among intubated patients than those not intubated: 25 022 of 43 311 (57.8%) vs 25 685 of 43 310 (59.3%), respectively (RR = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.96-0.99; P < .001). Good functional outcome was also lower among intubated patients than those not intubated: 4439 of 41 868 (10.6%) vs 5672 of 41 733 (13.6%), respectively (RR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.75-0.81; P < .001). Although differences existed in prespecified subgroup analyses, intubation was not associated with improved outcomes in any subgroup.Conclusions and relevanceAmong adult patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest, initiation of tracheal intubation within any given minute during the first 15 minutes of resuscitation, compared with no intubation during that minute, was associated with decreased survival to hospital discharge. Although the study design does not eliminate the potential for confounding by indication, these findings do not support early tracheal intubation for adult in-hospital cardiac arrest.

Project description:Background Hospitals participating in the national Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry receive an award for high rates of adherence to quality metrics for in-hospital cardiac arrest. We sought to evaluate whether awards based on these quality metrics can be considered a proxy for performance on cardiac arrest survival. Methods and Results Among 195 hospitals with continuous participation in Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation between 2012 and 2015, we identified 78 that received an award (Gold or Silver) for ≥85% compliance for all 4 metrics for in-hospital cardiac arrest-time to chest compressions, ≤1 minute; time to defibrillation, ≤2 minutes; device confirmation of endotracheal tube placement; and a monitored/witnessed arrest-for at least 12 consecutive months during 2014 to 2015. Award hospitals had higher cardiac arrest volumes than nonaward hospitals but otherwise had similar site characteristics. During 2014 to 2015, award hospitals had higher rates of return of spontaneous circulation for in-hospital cardiac arrest than nonaward hospitals (median [interquartile range], 71% [64%-77%] versus 66% [59%-74%]; Spearman ρ, 0.19; P=0.009). However, rates of risk-standardized survival to discharge at award hospitals (median, 25% [interquartile range, 22%-30%]) were similar to nonaward hospitals (median, 24% [interquartile range, 12%-27%]; Spearman ρ, 0.13; P=0.06). Among hospitals in the best tertile for survival to discharge in 2014 to 2015, 55.4% (36/65) did not receive an award, with poor discrimination of high-performing hospitals by award status (C statistic, 0.53). Similarly, there was only a weak association between hospitals' award status in 2014 to 2015 and their rates of survival to discharge in the preceding 2-year period (Spearman ρ, 0.16; P=0.03). Conclusions The current recognition mechanism within a national registry for in-hospital cardiac arrest captures hospital performance on return of spontaneous circulation but is not well correlated with survival to discharge. This suggests that current awards for resuscitation quality may not adequately capture hospital performance on overall survival-the outcome of greatest interest to patients.

Project description:National efforts to measure hospital performance in treating cardiac arrest have focused on case survival, with the hope of improving survival after cardiac arrest. However, it is plausible that hospitals with high case-survival rates do a poor job of preventing cardiac arrests in the first place.To describe the association between inpatient cardiac arrest incidence and survival rates.Within a large, national registry, we identified hospitals with at least 50 adult in-hospital cardiac arrest cases between January 1, 2000, and November 30, 2009. We used multivariable hierarchical regression to evaluate the correlation between a hospital's cardiac arrest incidence rate and its case-survival rate after adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics.The correlation between a hospital's incidence rate and case-survival rate for cardiac arrest.Of 102,153 cases at 358 hospitals, the median hospital cardiac arrest incidence rate was 4.02 per 1000 admissions (interquartile range, 2.95-5.65 per 1000 admissions), and the median hospital case-survival rate was 18.8% (interquartile range, 14.5%-22.6%). In crude analyses, hospitals with higher case-survival rates also had lower cardiac arrest incidence (r, -0.16; P = .003). This relationship persisted after adjusting for patient characteristics (r, -0.15; P = .004). After adjusting for potential mediators of this relationship (ie, hospital characteristics), the relationship between incidence and case survival was attenuated (r, -0.07; P = .18). The one modifiable hospital factor that most attenuated this relationship was a hospital's nurse-to-bed ratio (r, -0.12; P = .03).Hospitals with exceptional rates of survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest are also better at preventing cardiac arrests, even after adjusting for patient case mix. This relationship is partially mediated by measured hospital attributes. Performance measures focused on case-survival rates seem an appropriate first step in quality measurement for in-hospital cardiac arrest.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Prior studies have reported higher in-hospital survival with prompt defibrillation and epinephrine treatment in patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). Whether this survival benefit persists after discharge is unknown. METHODS:We linked data from a national IHCA registry with Medicare files and identified 36?961 patients ?65 years of age with an IHCA at 517 hospitals between 2000 and 2011. Patients with IHCA caused by pulseless ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation were stratified by prompt (?2 minutes) versus delayed (>2 minutes) defibrillation, whereas patients with IHCA caused by asystole or pulseless electric activity were stratified by prompt (?5 minutes) versus delayed (>5 minutes) epinephrine treatment. The association between prompt treatment and long-term survival for each rhythm type was assessed with multivariable hierarchical modified Poisson regression models. RESULTS:Of 8119 patients with an IHCA caused by ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation, the rate of 1-year survival was higher in those treated with prompt defibrillation than with delayed defibrillation (25.7% [1466 of 5714] versus 15.5% [373 of 2405]; adjusted relative risk [RR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.32-1.69; P<0.0001). This survival advantage persisted at 3 years (19.1% versus 11.0%; adjusted RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.23-1.69; P<0.0001) and at 5 years (14.7% versus 7.9%; adjusted RR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.22-1.83; P<0.0001). Of 28?842 patients with an IHCA caused by asystole/pulseless electric activity, the rate of 1-year survival with prompt epinephrine treatment was higher than with delayed treatment (5.4% [1341 of 24?885] versus 4.3% [168 of 3957]; adjusted RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.41; P=0.02), but this survival benefit was no longer present at 3 years (3.5% versus 2.9%; adjusted RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.95-1.45; P=0.15) and at 5 years (2.3% versus 1.9%; adjusted RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.88-1.58; P=0.27). CONCLUSIONS:Prompt defibrillation for IHCA caused by ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation was associated with higher rates of long-term survival throughout 5 years of follow-up, whereas prompt epinephrine treatment for asystole/pulseless electric activity was associated with greater survival at 1 year but not at 3 or 5 years. By quantifying the greater survival associated with timely defibrillation and epinephrine administration, these findings provide important insights into the durability of survival benefits for 2 process-of-care measures in current resuscitation guidelines.

Project description:Background Firefighter first responders dispatched in parallel with emergency medical services ( EMS ) personnel for out-of-hospital cardiac arrests ( OHCA ) can provide early defibrillation to improve survival. We examined whether survival following first responder defibrillation differed according to driving distance from nearest fire station to OHCA site. Methods and Results From the CARES (Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival) registry, we identified non- EMS witnessed OHCA s of presumed cardiac cause from 2010 to 2014 in Durham, Mecklenburg, and Wake counties, North Carolina. We used logistic regression to estimate the association between calculated driving distances (≤1, 1-1.5, 1.5-2, and >2 miles) and survival to hospital discharge following first responder defibrillation compared with defibrillation by EMS personnel. In total, 5020 OHCA s were included in the study. First responders more often applied the first automated external defibrillators at the shortest distances (≤1 mile) versus longest distances (>2 miles) (53.4% versus 46.6%, respectively, P<0.001). When compared with EMS defibrillation, first responder defibrillation within 1 mile and 1 to 1.5 miles of the nearest fire station was associated with increased survival to hospital discharge (odds ratio 2.01 [95% confidence interval 1.46-2.78] and odds ratio 1.61 [95% confidence interval 1.10-2.35], respectively). However, at the longest distances (1.5-2.0 and >2.0 miles), survival following first responder defibrillation did not differ from EMS defibrillation (odds ratio 0.77 [95% confidence interval 0.48-1.21] and odds ratio 0.97 [95% confidence interval 0.67-1.41], respectively). Conclusions Shorter driving distance from nearest fire station to OHCA location was associated with improved survival following defibrillation by first responders. These results suggest that the location of first responder units should be considered when organizing prehospital systems of OHCA care.

Dataset Information

The association between physician turnover (the "July Effect") and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest.

Publications

The association between physician turnover (the "July Effect") and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets