Dataset Information

Outcomes in adults living with frailty receiving cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Frailty is a clinical expression of adverse ageing which could be a valuable predictor of outcomes from cardiac arrest. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate survival outcomes in adults living with frailty versus adults living without frailty receiving cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) following cardiac arrest.

Methods

A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases was performed using pre-defined search terms, with no date or language restrictions applied. Prospective and retrospective observational studies measuring outcomes from CPR in adults assessed for frailty using an accepted clinical definition were selected.

Results

Eight eligible studies were included. Seven retrospective observational studies presenting high methodological quality were included in a meta-analysis comprising 1704 participants. Frailty was strongly associated with an increased likelihood of mortality after CPR, with moderate inter-study heterogeneity (OR = 3.56, 95% CI = 2.74-4.63, I² = 71%).

Discussion

This review supports the consideration of frailty status in a holistic approach to CPR. The present findings suggest that frailty status provides valuable prognostic information and could complement other known pre-arrest prognostic factors such as comorbidities in the context of Do Not Attempt CPR consideration. Awareness of the poorer outcomes in those living with frailty could support the identification of individuals less likely to benefit from CPR. Validation of our findings and evaluation of quality-of-life in frail individuals surviving cardiac arrest are prerequisites for the future integration of frailty status into CPR clinical decision-making.

Registration

Prospectively registered on PROSPERO: CRD42020223670.

SUBMITTER: Hamlyn J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9256816 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceWhether the cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) preferences of patients receiving dialysis align with their values and other aspects of end-of-life care is not known.ObjectiveTo describe the CPR preferences of patients receiving dialysis and how these preferences are associated with their responses to questions about other aspects of end-of-life care.Design, setting, and participantsCross-sectional survey study of a consecutive sample of patients receiving dialysis at 31 nonprofit dialysis facilities in 2 US metropolitan areas (Seattle, Washington, and Nashville, Tennessee) between April 22, 2015, and October 2, 2018. Analyses for this article were conducted between December 2018 and April 2020.ExposuresParticipants were asked to respond to the question "If you had to decide right now, would you want CPR if your heart were to stop beating?" Those who indicated they would probably or definitely want CPR were categorized as preferring CPR.Main outcomes and measuresThis study examined the association between preference for CPR and other treatment preferences, engagement in advance care planning, values, desired place of death, expectations about prognosis, symptoms, and palliative care needs.ResultsOf the 1434 individuals invited to complete the survey, 1009 agreed to participate, and 876 were included in the analytic cohort (61.1%). The final cohort had a mean (SD) age of 62.6 (14.0) years; 492 (56.2%) were men, and 528 (60.3%) were White individuals. Among 738 of 876 participants (84.2%) who indicated that they would definitely or probably want CPR (CPR group), 555 (75.2%) wanted mechanical ventilation vs 13 of 138 (9.4%) of those who did not want CPR (do not resuscitate [DNR] group) (P < .001). A total of 249 of 738 participants (33.7%) in the CPR group vs 84 of 138 (60.9%) in the DNR group had documented treatment preferences (P < .001). In terms of values about future care, 171 participants (23.2%) in the CPR group vs 5 of 138 (3.6%) in the DNR group valued life prolongation (P < .001); 320 in the CPR group (43.4%) vs 109 of 138 in the DNR group (79.0%) valued comfort (P < .001); and 247 participants (33.5%) in the CPR group vs 24 of 138 (17.4%) in the DNR group were unsure about their wishes for future care (P < .001). In the CPR group, 207 (28.0%) had thought about stopping dialysis vs 62 of 138 (44.9%) in the DNR group (P < .001), and 181 (24.5%) vs 58 of 138 (42.0%) had discussed stopping dialysis (P = .001). No statistically significant associations were observed between CPR preference and documentation of a surrogate decision maker, thoughts or discussion of hospice, preferred place of death, expectations about prognosis, reported symptoms, or palliative care needs.Conclusions and relevanceThe CPR preferences of patients receiving dialysis were associated with some, but not all, other aspects of end-of-life care. How participants responded to questions about these other aspects of end-of-life care were not always aligned with their CPR preference. More work is needed to integrate discussions about code status with bigger picture conversations about patients' values, goals, and preferences for end-of-life care.

Project description:ObjectiveExperimental studies of head-up positioning (HUP) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) have had some degree of conflicting published results. The current study aim was to analyze and reconcile those discrepancies in order to better clarify the effects of HUP CPR compared to conventional supine (SUP) CPR.MethodsThree databases (PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library) were searched comprehensively (from each respective database's inception to May 2021) for articles addressing HUP CPR. The primary outcome to be observed was cerebral perfusion pressure (CerPP), and secondary outcomes were mean intracranial pressure (ICP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), coronary perfusion pressure (CoPP) and frequencies of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC).ResultsSeven key studies involving 131 animals were included for analysis. Compared to SUP CPR, CerPP (MD 10.37; 95% CI 7.11-13.64; p < 0.01; I2 = 58%) and CoPP (MD 7.56; 95% CI 1.84-13.27, p = 0.01; I2 = 75%) increased significantly with HUP CPR, while ICP (MD - 13.66; 95% CI - 18.6 to -8.71; p < 0.01; I2 = 96%) decreased significantly. Combining all study methodologies, there were no significant differences detected in MAP (MD - 1.63; 95% CI - 10.77-7.52; p = 0.73; I2 = 93%) or frequency of ROSC (RR 0.9; 95% CI 0.31-2.60; p = 0.84; I2 = 65%). However, in contrast to worse outcomes in studies using immediate elevation of the head in a reverse Trendelenburg position, study outcomes were significantly improved when HUP (head and chest only) was introduced in a steady, graduated manner following a brief period of basic CPR augmented by active compression-decompression (ACD) and impedance threshold (ITD) devices.ConclusionIn experimental models, gradually elevating the head and chest following a brief interval of circulatory priming with ACD and ITD devices can enhance CoPP, lower ICP and improve CerPP significantly while maintaining MAP. This effect is immediate, remains sustained and is associated with improved outcomes.