The European Resuscitation Council (ERC) has produced these Systems Saving Lives guidelines, which are based on the 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Science with Treatment Recommendations. The topics covered include chain of survival, measuring performance of resuscitation, social media and smartphones apps for engaging community, European Restart a Heart Day, World Restart a Heart, KIDS SAVE LIVES campaign, lower-resource setting, European Resuscitation Academy and Global Resuscitation Alliance, early warning scores, rapid response systems, and medical emergency team, cardiac arrest centres and role of dispatcher.

No abstract

For this 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations , the Education, Implementation, and Teams Task Force applied the population, intervention, comparator, outcome, study design, time frame format and performed 15 systematic reviews, applying the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidance. Furthermore, 4 scoping reviews and 7 evidence updates assessed any new evidence to determine if a change in any existing treatment recommendation was required. The topics covered included training for the treatment of opioid overdose; basic life support, including automated external defibrillator training; measuring implementation and performance in communities, and cardiac arrest centers; advanced life support training, including team and leadership training and rapid response teams; measuring cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance, feedback devices, and debriefing; and the use of social media to improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation application.

No abstract

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) interferes with the vascular endothelium. It is not known whether COVID‐19 additionally affects arterial stiffness. Methods This case–control study compared brachial‐ankle pulse wave (baPWV) and carotid‐femoral pulse wave velocities (cfPWV) of acutely ill patients with and without COVID‐19. Results Twenty‐two COVID‐19 patients (50% females, 77 [67–84] years) were compared with 22 age‐ and sex‐matched controls. In COVID‐19 patients, baPWV (19.9 [18.4–21.0] vs. 16.0 [14.2–20.4], P = 0.02) and cfPWV (14.3 [13.4–16.0] vs. 11.0 [9.5–14.6], P = 0.01) were higher than in the controls. In multiple regression analysis, COVID‐19 was independently associated with higher cfPWV ( β = 3.164, P = 0.004) and baPWV ( β = 3.532, P = 0.003). PWV values were higher in nonsurvivors. In survivors, PWV correlated with length of hospital stay. Conclusion COVID‐19 appears to be related to an enhanced PWV reflecting an increase in arterial stiffness. Higher PWV might be related to an increased length of hospital stay and mortality.