A Worthy Effort

Cardiac-resuscitation rules would be useful, but further study is necessary



| Tuesday, October 14, 2008

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Emergency medical resources are precious and expensive, so it is important that they not be wasted.

A study published last month in The Journal of the American Medical Association seeks to refocus efforts to resuscitate heart-attack patients so that medical resources can be used more wisely.

The study suggests that emergency medical crews apply a set of rules to heart-attack victims to determine whether taking them to a hospital for more treatment would make a difference in the outcome.

Heart attacks strike 166,000 Americans every year, and the vast majority -- 154,000 -- won't survive, regardless of whether they get to a hospital.

Keeping those patients who have no chance for survival out of the emergency room can free doctors, nurses and beds for other patients in need of care, saving time and money.

The study, which looked at 5,505 cases, put forth two sets of rules to evaluate patients. The first one, called basic life support, says EMS crews should stop resuscitation efforts if the patient's heart stopped before the crew arrived, no defibrillator was used and the crew was unable get the patient's blood to begin circulating. Under that rule, more than 1,600 trips to the emergency room would have been eliminated. However, of those patients who would have been declared dead on the scene under those guidelines, five survived and were released from the hospital.

The second rule, called advanced life support, is a more conservative approach. It adds two criteria: no one witnessed the heart attack and no one attempted CPR.

With those additional criteria, 245 trips to the emergency room would have been eliminated. None of the patients who would have been declared dead under advanced life support survived long enough to leave the hospital. In other words, everyone who would have been declared dead at the scene would have been declared dead at the hospital.

Having a set of rules to dictate the proper treatment of heart-attack victims would be useful. Of course, emergency medical crews are not equal. Some are as well-equipped to revive heart-attack victims as an emergency-room team.

Others get less training and have less experience. That's probably why survival rates for heart-attack victims differ widely throughout the country.

Such important policy decisions should not be based on one small study. More studies should be conducted. Fine-tuning EMS policies to husband medical resources without putting patients' lives in jeopardy is worth the effort.

Connect: Have a thought or feedback about this? Add your comment now
Related Topics: Cardiac and Circulation

What's Your Take? Comment Now ...

Featured Careers & Jobs in EMS



Get JEMS in Your Inbox


Fire EMS Blogs

Blogger Browser

Today's Featured Posts


EMS Airway Clinic

Innovation & Progress

Follow in the footsteps of these inspirational leaders of EMS.
More >

Multimedia Thumb

Tennessee County EMS Shows Off CPR Tool

Lucas 2 in service in Bradley County.
Watch It >

Multimedia Thumb

Abilene Loses Helicopter Service

Native Air leaves city with only one air helicopter service.
Watch It >

Multimedia Thumb

D.C. Fire Chief Proposes another Controversial Ambulance Plan

Staffing change will leave immediate neighborhood without fire apparatus.
Watch It >

Multimedia Thumb


Mike McEvoy and A.J. Heightman discuss some new EMS technology at FDIC 2014.
Watch It >

Multimedia Thumb

LMA MAD Nasal™

Needle-free intranasal drug delivery.
Watch It >

Multimedia Thumb

VividTrac offered by Vivid Medical - EMS Today 2013

VividTrac, affordable high performance video intubation device.
Watch It >

Multimedia Thumb

Braun Ambulances' EZ Door Forward

Helps to create a safer ambulance module.
Watch It >

More Product Videos >