Objective This study aimed to compare the outcomes of adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) before and after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in a large metropolitan city.Methods This before-and-after observational study used a prospective citywide OHCA registry. Adult patients with emergency medical service-treated OHCA, with presumed cardiac etiology, pre-and post-COVID-19 outbreak were enrolled. The study period spanned 2 months, starting from February 18, 2020. The control period was 2 months from February 18, 2019. The primary and secondary outcomes were good neurologic outcome and survival to hospital discharge, respectively. The association between the COVID-19 outbreak and OHCA outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression analysis. ResultsThis study analyzed 297 OHCA patients (control period, 145; study period, 152). The bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation rates were 64.8% and 60.5% during the control and study periods, respectively. Response and on-scene times increased by 2 minutes, supraglottic airway use increased by 35.6%, and mechanical chest compression device use increased by 13% post-COVID-19 outbreak. Good neurologic outcome was significantly lower during the study period in overall OHCAs (adjusted odds ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-0.98) and in witnessed OHCAs (adjusted odds ratio, 0.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.90). No significant difference was found in the survival to hospital discharge of OHCA patients between the two periods. ConclusionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, the response and on-scene times were longer, and good neurologic outcome was significantly lower than that in the control period.

IntroductionVarious methods and devices have been described for cooling after cardiac arrest, but the ideal cooling method remains unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the neurological outcomes, efficacies and adverse events of surface and endovascular cooling techniques in cardiac arrest patients.MethodsWe performed a multicenter, retrospective, registry-based study of adult cardiac arrest patients treated with therapeutic hypothermia presenting to 24 hospitals across South Korea from 2007 to 2012. We included patients who received therapeutic hypothermia using overall surface or endovascular cooling devices and compared the neurological outcomes, efficacies and adverse events of both cooling techniques. To adjust for differences in the baseline characteristics of each cooling method, we performed one-to-one matching by the propensity score.ResultsIn total, 803 patients were included in the analysis. Of these patients, 559 underwent surface cooling, and the remaining 244 patients underwent endovascular cooling. In the unmatched cohort, a greater number of adverse events occurred in the surface cooling group. Surface cooling was significantly associated with a poor neurological outcome (cerebral performance category 3–5) at hospital discharge (p = 0.01). After propensity score matching, surface cooling was not associated with poor neurological outcome and hospital mortality [odds ratio (OR): 1.26, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.81-1.96, p = 0.31 and OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.55-1.30, p = 0.44, respectively]. Although surface cooling was associated with an increased incidence of adverse events (such as overcooling, rebound hyperthermia, rewarming related hypoglycemia and hypotension) compared with endovascular cooling, these complications were not associated with surface cooling using hydrogel pads.ConclusionsIn the overall matched cohort, no significant difference in neurological outcomes and hospital morality was observed between the surface and endovascular cooling methods.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0819-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The first confirmed community transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 in Daegu Metropolitan City, South Korea, occurred on February 18, 2020. In the following 70-day period, approximately 6000 new cases occurred, severely impacting the medical service system. This study investigated the crisis-impact on the local emergency transport system. Emergency medical service activity reports were retrospectively reviewed to determine patient demographics and initial vital signs. Delay in reaching the patient, transporting the patient to the hospital, and returning to the fire station were assessed and categorized based on patients’ initial vital signs. The study period was divided into 4 groups (1/1–2/18, 2/19–3/3, 3/4–3/31, and 4/1–04/30) and intergroup differences were analyzed. When compared to Period 1, the time-difference between the request to attend a scene and arrival at the scene was delayed in Periods 2, 3, and 4 by 4 minute 58 s, 3  minute 24 seconds, and 2 minute 20 seconds, respectively; that between arriving at the scene and at the hospital was delayed by 7  minute 43 seconds, 6 minutes 59 seconds, and 4 minutes 30 seconds, respectively; and that between arriving at the hospital and returning to the fire station was delayed by 29  minute 3 second, 25  minute 55 second, and 18  minute 44 second, respectively. In Period 2, for patients with symptoms of severe illness when compared to patients lacking such symptoms, the time-difference between the request to attend the scene and arrival at a hospital and between arrival at the hospital and returning to the fire station were 6 to 23 minute and 12 to 48 minute longer, respectively. Most of the delays impacted patients with a fever. In terms of condition, the statistical effect size for delay in transport time was from large to small: fever, hypoxia, abnormal respiratory rate, respiratory symptom, and hypotension. Outbreaks of infectious disease cause a paradoxical state in emergency medical transport systems, inducing delays in the transport of severely ill patients. Therefore, maintenance and improvement of the medical service system for both patients with infectious disease and those with other severe illnesses is required.

No abstract