TY - JOUR
T1 - The system-wide effect of real-time audiovisual feedback and postevent debriefing for in-hospital cardiac arrest
T2 - The cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality improvement initiative
AU - Couper, Keith
AU - Kimani, Peter K.
AU - Abella, Benjamin S.
AU - Chilwan, Mehboob
AU - Cooke, Matthew W.
AU - Davies, Robin P.
AU - Field, Richard A.
AU - Gao, Fang
AU - Quinton, Sarah
AU - Stallard, Nigel
AU - Woolley, Sarah
AU - Perkins, Gavin D.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - Objective: To evaluate the effect of implementing real-time audiovisual feedback with and without postevent debriefing on survival and quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality at in-hospital cardiac arrest. Design: A two-phase, multicentre prospective cohort study. Setting: Three UK hospitals, all part of one National Health Service Acute Trust. Patients: One thousand three hundred and ninety-five adult patients who sustained an in-hospital cardiac arrest at the study hospitals and were treated by hospital emergency teams between November 2009 and May 2013. Interventions: During phase 1, quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and patient outcomes were measured with no intervention implemented. During phase 2, staff at hospital 1 received real-time audiovisual feedback, whereas staff at hospital 2 received realtime audiovisual feedback supplemented by postevent debriefing. No intervention was implemented at hospital 3 during phase 2. Measurements and Main Results: The primary outcome was return of spontaneous circulation. Secondary endpoints included other patient-focused outcomes, such as survival to hospital discharge, and process-focused outcomes, such as chest compression depth. Random-effect logistic and linear regression models, adjusted for baseline patient characteristics, were used to analyze the effect of the interventions on study outcomes. In comparison with no intervention, neither real-time audiovisual feedback (adjusted odds ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.31-1.22; p = 0.17) nor real-time audiovisual feedback supplemented by postevent debriefing (adjusted odds ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.35-1.21; p = 0.17) was associated with a statistically significant improvement in return of spontaneous circulation or any process-focused outcome. Despite this, there was evidence of a system-wide improvement in phase 2, leading to improvements in return of spontaneous circulation (adjusted odds ratio, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.06-3.30; p = 0.03) and process-focused outcomes. Conclusions: Implementation of real-time audiovisual feedback with or without postevent debriefing did not lead to a measured improvement in patient or process-focused outcomes at individual hospital sites. However, there was an unexplained system-wide improvement in return of spontaneous circulation and process-focused outcomes during the second phase of the study.
AB - Objective: To evaluate the effect of implementing real-time audiovisual feedback with and without postevent debriefing on survival and quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality at in-hospital cardiac arrest. Design: A two-phase, multicentre prospective cohort study. Setting: Three UK hospitals, all part of one National Health Service Acute Trust. Patients: One thousand three hundred and ninety-five adult patients who sustained an in-hospital cardiac arrest at the study hospitals and were treated by hospital emergency teams between November 2009 and May 2013. Interventions: During phase 1, quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and patient outcomes were measured with no intervention implemented. During phase 2, staff at hospital 1 received real-time audiovisual feedback, whereas staff at hospital 2 received realtime audiovisual feedback supplemented by postevent debriefing. No intervention was implemented at hospital 3 during phase 2. Measurements and Main Results: The primary outcome was return of spontaneous circulation. Secondary endpoints included other patient-focused outcomes, such as survival to hospital discharge, and process-focused outcomes, such as chest compression depth. Random-effect logistic and linear regression models, adjusted for baseline patient characteristics, were used to analyze the effect of the interventions on study outcomes. In comparison with no intervention, neither real-time audiovisual feedback (adjusted odds ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.31-1.22; p = 0.17) nor real-time audiovisual feedback supplemented by postevent debriefing (adjusted odds ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.35-1.21; p = 0.17) was associated with a statistically significant improvement in return of spontaneous circulation or any process-focused outcome. Despite this, there was evidence of a system-wide improvement in phase 2, leading to improvements in return of spontaneous circulation (adjusted odds ratio, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.06-3.30; p = 0.03) and process-focused outcomes. Conclusions: Implementation of real-time audiovisual feedback with or without postevent debriefing did not lead to a measured improvement in patient or process-focused outcomes at individual hospital sites. However, there was an unexplained system-wide improvement in return of spontaneous circulation and process-focused outcomes during the second phase of the study.
KW - Cardiac arrest
KW - Cardiopulmonary resuscitation
KW - Debriefing
KW - Feedback
KW - Guideline adherence
KW - Quality improvement
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84944463507&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001202
DO - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001202
M3 - Article
C2 - 26186567
AN - SCOPUS:84944463507
SN - 0090-3493
VL - 43
SP - 2321
EP - 2331
JO - Critical Care Medicine
JF - Critical Care Medicine
IS - 11
ER -