RESUMEN
Introduction: Intrapartum-related events account for nearly 700,000 neonatal deaths globally yearly. Endotracheal intubation is a cornerstone in preventing many of these deaths, but it is a difficult skill to acquire. Previous studies have described intubation performances in high-income countries, but data from low- and middle-income countries are lacking. We aimed to assess the performance of delivery room intubation in a lower middle-income country. Methods: This prospective observational study was conducted at the Phu San Hanoi Hospital, Vietnam, from September 2020 to January 2021. Video cameras were positioned above the resuscitation tables and data were extracted using adopted software (NeoTapAS). All neonates requiring positive pressure ventilation were included. Our main variables of interest were time to first intubation attempt, first intubation attempt duration, and successful first intubation attempt. Results: 18,107 neonates were born during the five months. Of these, 75 (0.4%) received positive pressure ventilation, and 36 (0.2%) required endotracheal intubation of whom 24 were captured on video. The median time to the first intubation attempt was 252 seconds (range 91-771 seconds), the median first attempt duration was 49 seconds (range 10-105 seconds), and the first attempt success rate was 75%. Conclusion: Incidences of positive pressure ventilation and endotracheal intubation were low in comparison to global estimates. Three out of four intubations were successful at the first attempt and the procedural duration was often longer than recommended. Future studies should focus on how to achieve and maintain intubation skills and could include considering alternative devices for airway management at birth.
RESUMEN
Background: Effective training and retraining may be key to good quality paediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation (pCPR). PCPR skills decay within months after training, making the current retraining intervals ineffective. Establishing an effective retraining strategy is fundamental to improve quality of performance and potentially enhance patient outcomes. Objective: To investigate the intervals and strategies of formal paediatric resuscitation retraining provided to healthcare professionals, and the associated outcomes including patient outcomes, quality of performance, retention of knowledge and skills and rescuer's confidence. Methods: This review was drafted and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). PubMed, Medline, Cochrane, Embase, CINAHL Complete, ERIC and Web of Science were searched and studies addressing the PICOST question were selected. Results: The results indicate complex data due to significant heterogeneity among study findings in relation to study design, retraining strategies, outcome measures and length of intervention. Out of 4706 studies identified, 21 were included with most of them opting for monthly or more frequent retraining sessions. The length of intervention ranged from 2-minutes up to 3.5 hours, with most studies selecting shorter durations (<1h). All studies pointed to the importance of regular retraining sessions for acquisition and retention of pCPR skills. Conclusions: Brief and frequent pCPR retraining may result in more successful skill retention and consequent higher-quality performance. There is no strong evidence regarding the ideal retraining schedule however, with as little as two minutes of refresher training every month, there is the potential to increase pCPR performance and retain the skills for longer.
RESUMEN
Aim: Positive pressure ventilation via a facemask is critical in neonatal resuscitation, but frequently results in mask leak, obstruction, and inadequate respiratory support. This systematic review aimed to determine whether the display of respiratory function monitoring improved resuscitation or clinical outcomes. Methods: Randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes when respiratory function monitoring was displayed versus not displayed for newborns requiring positive pressure ventilation at birth were selected and from databases (last search August 2022), and assessed for risk of bias using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tools for randomized control trials. The study was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations was used to assess the certainty of evidence. Treatment recommendations were approved by the Neonatal Life Support Task Force of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. Results reported primary and secondary outcomes and included resuscitation and clinical outcomes. Results: Of 2294 unique articles assessed for eligibility, three randomized controlled trials were included (observational studies excluded) (n = 443 patients). For predefined resuscitation and clinical outcomes, these studies either did not report the primary outcome (time to heart rate ≥ 100 bpm from birth), had differing reporting methods (achieving desired tidal volumes, significant mask leak) or did not find significant differences (intubation rate, air leaks, death before hospital discharge, severe intraventricular hemorrhage, chronic lung disease). Limitations included limited sample size for critical outcomes, inconsistent definitions amongst studies and unreported long-term outcomes. Conclusion: Although respiratory function monitoring has been utilized in clinical care, there is currently insufficient evidence to suggest its benefit for newborn infants receiving respiratory support for resuscitation at birth. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42021278169 (registered November 27, 2021). Funding: The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation provided support that included access to software platforms and teleconferencing.
RESUMEN
Background: Respiratory distress is common during transition after birth, but the effect of continuous positive airway pressure applied in the delivery room has not been systematically evaluated in spontaneously breathing term and ≥34+0 weeks' gestation infants.We aimed to compare delivery room continuous positive airway pressure with no delivery room continuous positive airway pressure for term and ≥34+0 weeks' gestation newborn infants at birth. Methods: Information sources: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Databases, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. The Databases were last searched in October 2021.Eligibility criteria: Randomized, quasi-randomized, interrupted time series, controlled before-after, and cohort studies with English abstracts.Synthesis of results: Two authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and certainty of evidence. The main outcome was admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) or higher level of care receiving any positive pressure support. Data were pooled using fixed effects models.Risk of bias: Was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized trials and the Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions Tool (ROBINS-I) for observational studies. Results: In this meta-analysis, two randomized control trials (323 newborns delivered by cesarean section) showed that delivery room continuous positive airway pressure decreased the likelihood of NICU admission (risk ratio (RR) 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 (0.11-0.66), p < 0.005) and NICU respiratory support (RR (95% CI) 0.18 (0.05-0.60), p = 0.005) when compared with no delivery room continuous positive airway pressure. However, in two before-after studies (8,476 newborns), delivery room continuous positive airway pressure use was associated with an increased risk of air leak syndrome when compared with no delivery room continuous positive airway pressure. Discussion: Certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes. Among term and ≥34+0 weeks' gestation infants having or at risk of having respiratory distress, there is insufficient evidence to suggest for or against routine use of continuous positive airway pressure in the delivery room.Funding: No Funding has been received to conduct this study.Clinical Trial Registration: This systematic review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/) [identifier: CRD42021225812].
RESUMEN
Aims: The Prehospital Optimal Shock Energy for Defibrillation (POSED) study will assess the feasibility of conducting a cluster randomised controlled study of clinical effectiveness in UK ambulance services to identify the optimal shock energy for defibrillation. Methods: POSED is a pragmatic, allocation concealed, open label, cluster randomised, controlled feasibility study. Defibrillators within a single UK ambulance service will be randomised in an equal ratio to deliver one of three shock strategies 120-150-200 J, 150-200-200 J, 200-200-200 J. Consecutive adults (≥18 years) presenting with out of hospital cardiac arrest requiring defibrillation will be eligible. The study plans to enrol 90 patients (30 in each group). Patients (or their relatives for non-survivors) will be informed about trial participation after the initial emergency has resolved. Survivors will be invited to consent to participate in follow-up (i.e., at 30 days or discharge).The primary feasibility outcome is the proportion of eligible patients who receive the randomised study intervention. Secondary feasibility outcomes will include recruitment rate, adherence to allocated treatment and data completeness. Clinical outcomes will include Return of an Organised Rhythm (ROOR) at 2 minutes post-shock, refibrillation rate, Return of Spontaneous Circulation (ROSC) at hospital handover, survival and neurological outcome at 30 days. Conclusion: The POSED study will assess the feasibility of a large-scale trial and explore opportunities to optimise the trial protocol.Trial registration: ISRCTN16327029.
RESUMEN
Context: Upper airway suctioning at birth was considered standard procedure and is still commonly practiced. Negative effects could exceed benefits of suction. Question: In infants born through clear amniotic fluid (P) does suctioning of the mouth and nose (I) vs no suctioning (C) improve outcomes (O). Data sources: Information specialist conducted literature search (12th September 2021, re-run 17th June 2022) using Medline, Embase, Cochrane Databases, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and CINAHL. RCTs, non-RCTs and observational studies with a defined selection strategy were included. Unpublished studies, reviews, editorials, animal and manikin studies were excluded. Data extraction: Two authors independently extracted data, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane ROB2 and ROBINS-I tools. Certainty of evidence was assed using the GRADE framework. Review Manager was used to analyse data and GRADEPro to develop summary of evidence tables. Meta-analyses were performed if ≥2 RCTs were available. Outcomes: Primary: assisted ventilation. Secondary: advanced resuscitation, oxygen supplementation, adverse effects of suctioning, unanticipated NICU admission. Results: Nine RCTs (n = 1096) and 2 observational studies (n = 418) were identified. Two RCTs (n = 280) with data concerns were excluded post-hoc. Meta-analysis of 3 RCTs, (n = 702) showed no difference in primary outcome. Two RCTs (n = 200) and 2 prospective observational studies (n = 418) found lower oxygen saturations in first 10 minutes of life with suctioning. Two RCTs (n = 200) showed suctioned newborns took longer to achieve target saturations. Limitations: Certainty of evidence was low or very low for all outcomes. Most studies selected healthy newborns limiting generalisability and insufficient data was available for planned subgroup analyses. Conclusions: Despite low certainty evidence, this review suggests no clinical benefit from suctioning clear amniotic fluid from infants following birth, with some evidence suggesting a resulting desaturation. These finding support current guideline recommendations that this practice is not used as a routine step in birth. Funding: The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation provided access to software platforms, an information specialist and teleconferencing. Clinical Trial Registration: This systematic review was registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/) (identifier: CRD42021286258).
RESUMEN
Background: There are increasing numbers of reports of cognitive activity, consciousness, awareness and recall related to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and interventions such as the use of sedative and analgesic drugs during CPR. Objectives: This scoping review aims to describe the available evidence concerning CPR-related cognitive activity, consciousness, awareness and recall and interventions such as the use of sedative and analgesic drugs during CPR. Methods: A literature search was conducted of Medline, Embase and CINAHL from inception to 21 October 2021. We included case studies, observational studies, review studies and grey literature. Results: We identified 8 observational studies including 40,317 patients and 464 rescuers, and 26 case reports including 33 patients. The reported prevalence of CPR-induced consciousness was between 0.23% to 0.9% of resuscitation attempts, with 48-59% of experienced professional rescuers surveyed estimated to have observed CPR-induced consciousness. CPR-induced consciousness is associated with professional rescuer CPR, witnessed arrest, a shockable rhythm, increased return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), and survival to hospital discharge when compared to patients without CPR-induced consciousness. Few studies of sedation for CPR-induced consciousness were identified. Although local protocols for treating CPR-induced consciousness exist, there is no widely accepted guidance. Conclusions: CPR-related cognitive activity, consciousness, awareness and recall is uncommon but increasingly reported by professional rescuers. The data available was heterogeneous in nature and not suitable for progression to a systematic review process. Although local treatment protocols exist for management of CPR-induced consciousness, there are no widely accepted treatment guidelines. More studies are required to investigate the management of CPR-induced consciousness.
RESUMEN
AIM: To evaluate the individual use and predictive value of focused echocardiography, end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO2), invasive arterial blood pressure (BP) and near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in children. METHODS: This scoping review was undertaken as part of the continuous evidence evaluation process of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) and based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews. PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE were searched from the last ILCOR reviews until September 2020. We included all published studies evaluating the effect of echocardiography, EtCO2, BP or NIRS guided CPR on clinical outcomes and quality of CPR. RESULTS: We identified eight observational studies, including 288 children. Two case series reported the use of echocardiography, one in detecting pulmonary emboli, the second in cardiac standstill, where contractility was regained with the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The two studies describing EtCO2 were ambivalent regarding the association between mean values and any outcomes. Mean diastolic BP was associated with increased survival and favourable neurological outcome, but not with new substantive morbidity in two studies describing an overlapping population. NIRS values reflected changes in EtCO2 and cerebral blood volume index in two studies, with lower values in patients who did not achieve return of circulation. CONCLUSION: Although there seems some beneficial effect of these intra-arrest variables, higher quality paediatric studies are needed to evaluate whether echocardiography, EtCO2, BP or NIRS guided CPR could improve outcomes.