Basics Ability to Terminate Field Resucitation

Ridryder911

EMS Guru
Messages
5,923
Reaction score
40
Points
48
Interesting study, I highlighted what I considered to be more imperative.

Study indicates improvement in EMS responders’ ability to identify unsuccessful resuscitation
August 2, 2006
Proposed guidelines could improve dignity of patients and families and enhance safety of paramedic crews

TORONTO, ON – Prehospital care experts at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre have validated a guideline that emergency medical service (EMS) responders trained in the use of automatic defibrillation can use to identify patients who will not survive after suffering a cardiac arrest. The study, which examined over 1200 adult patients suffering an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, appears in the New England Journal of Medicine’s August 3rd issue.

For many years termination of resuscitation (TOR) protocols have existed for paramedics trained in advanced cardiac life support care including defibrillation, intravenous drugs and advanced airway management. However, for EMS responders trained solely in defibrillation, all patients required transport to the nearest emergency department for ongoing resuscitation efforts, which were almost always unsuccessful. As a result, large numbers of patients with little or no potential for survival are regularly transported to emergency departments. The continued resuscitation effort and emergency transfer negatively impacts the patient’s family, the receiving emergency department and the EMS system.

“The family is forced to begin the grieving process in a busy emergency department often lacking privacy and dignity rather than in the comfort of their own home,” says Dr. Laurie Morrison, lead investigator on the study and director of the Prehospital and Transport Medicine Research Program. “Many studies have shown that families’ long term grief adjustment is as good or better with in-the-home termination of resuscitation. In addition transporting patients by speeding ambulance can cause motor vehicle injuries resulting in injury to other drivers, pedestrians and EMS personnel.”

The Termination of Resuscitation guideline determines that resuscitation can be stopped if all of the following are true: (1) no return of pulse is achieved; (2) no shock to the heart was given; and (3) the cardiac arrest was not directly witnessed by EMS responders. During the study’s trial, current procedures for cardiac resuscitation did not change. Patients who fit the criteria were documented and followed-up over a six month period.

The main results of the study showed there was a 99.5 per cent probability that patients who fit all three criteria would not survive if transported to the nearest emergency department. Implementation of the guideline would result in only 37 per cent of patients requiring transport to the emergency department rather than the current practice of 100 per cent.

“We did not expect to find that the guideline would show a 100 per cent probability of not surviving since there are so many unique factors associated with each cardiac arrest,” says Dr. Richard Verbeek, a co-author of the study and medical director for the Sunnybrook-Osler Centre for Prehospital Care. “That is why emergency medical responders must contact an emergency physician to discuss each individual call when the guideline is used. The emergency physician will take into account other clinical aspects of the call before any final decision to terminate resuscitation is made. This guideline helps to determine when ongoing resuscitation will not be successful, but also does not deny potentially viable patients full resuscitation and the best chance for survival.”

Past research has demonstrated that over 96 per cent of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients do not survive and are pronounced dead upon arrival at the hospital. This low survival rate is primarily due to the fact that very few bystanders in Canada provide CPR in the initial stages of cardiac arrest. In many cases, when CPR is performed the patient’s heart is more likely to attain a recoverable rhythm, which makes it easier to resuscitate the patient.

“I see the results of this study, not only as a way to focus our resources more effectively, but also as a strong indication of how vital it is for members of the public to receive training in CPR and to overcome their fear to provide CPR to a stranger or a loved one who suffers a cardiac arrest,” says Dr. Morrison. “It’s no myth, CPR could mean the difference between life and death.”

The trial involved 24 regional EMS systems across Ontario. The TOR guideline is currently going through an implementation trial. Eight communities are involved in this stage, and will be looking at the guideline’s impact on the system, providers and various stakeholders.

Opinons ?

R/r 911
 
I strongly agree with this study and its findings. There has been times in my career at the BLS level when I have been working on a patient that has coded and I knew, based on how the patient presented and events that lead up to the call that we were just "pumping on a body." As long as the criteria is met, and the protocal is followed to the letter, I believe this is a good thing.
 
Interesting! We have been taught that in the field, even when we are pretty sure the pt isn't going to make it, the continuation of CPR is a way of showing the family that all is being done to save their loved one. We have also been told that its better for the family to have the trip to the hospital so there will be social workers and hospice professionals to help them deal with the grief.

I just had a call to a frequent flier with several things trying to kill her at once. She'd been in a hospital bed for years. I know I'd seen a POLST (Physicians Orders on Life Sustaining Treatment, basically a DNR) several times on previous calls. Husband is home alone, she quit breathing, he's denying the existance of the POLST, wants full on, everything possible done for her. She died eventually, in ICU later that night.

Taking her to the hospital meant her husband had time to call family members and get a support network together for himself but it also meant a huge ICU bill.

Like most things in EMS I'm guessing we'll line up on either side of this issue with valid points all around.
 
Interesting and very valid points.... just playing devils advocate, as well as actually concerning an ethical dilemma.

If one knows by the standards....i.e. no shocks advisable, down time and no CPR has been provided prior to arrival and they will cease all resuscitation efforts immediately upon arrival at ER. What have we really provided other than false hopes and a huge financial burden? Would it not be unethical to transport and continue efforts on a patient that one knows all efforts will be ceased upon arrival. Another words, working them for the "sake" only.

I found this debate on another forum and thought it was interesting. As well I am finding more and more EMT's are uncomfortable with grieving families. Some have even stated that it is not their job? Funny, I swear, I was taught and have always thought the deceased was no longer my patient but now the family is. It does not take a social worker, Chaplain or crisis intervention manager to console family members. I find this even more disturbing by the responses I have read. It does not take much time to tell them you are sorry for their loss, and notify a minister, other family members. WE always have a LEO on a DOA and they will notify ME and funeral home. It is all taken care of within 30 minutes.

I believe many have a misconception of what usually occurs in a hospital. True, many times a MSW or Chaplain will place them into the dreaded family room (which when this occurs, most know it is bad news time) or may have policies to view resuscitation efforts.

Money is not are main concern, but an additional $3000 for a Doc to say stop when you enter the ER is additional expense, to be considered.

Many new ACLS EMS policy around here is two rounds of meds and good CPR, if still aystole... call it, no transport.

Good thoughts and ideas....

R/r 911
 
I found this debate on another forum and thought it was interesting. As well I am finding more and more EMT's are uncomfortable with grieving families. Some have even stated that it is not their job? Funny, I swear, I was taught and have always thought the deceased was no longer my patient but now the family is. It does not take a social worker, Chaplain or crisis intervention manager to console family members. I find this even more disturbing by the responses I have read. It does not take much time to tell them you are sorry for their loss, and notify a minister, other family members.

R/r 911

Well said. We have 'Support Officers' volunteer pastors, priests and grief counselors who can be dispatched to any call where the family needs support. But I've seen few instances in my agency where they have been utilized.

I am concerned about a black or white pronouncement about what is to be done in every case. I think we have to be able to read the individual situation and determine which is the best decision in that particular case. Financial concerns is one factor, but not in all cases the most important.

I work in a unique environment though and most of my patients are people I know and families I interact with on and off the job. The case I mentioned above wasn't just a frequent flyer but also "Kenny's Grandma"
 
I can see how some EMT's could have that opinion, in the field the patient contacts are very brief by comparison to the patient in a hospital and the almost the same nursing staff with the same patient day after day. When I worked acute care and Rid, I'm sure you will agree with me on this, You get the patient from the E.D. post Code Blue to the units and the patient "lingers" for a while, (hours to sometimes days) and passes away. (I always did hate the word "expired") or there is a push for unit beds or family agrees to transfer the patient to a Med-Surg floor and also does the waiting game for that poor soul to pass away. I have been on both sides of the gurney, and I feel I have a pretty good understanding on how both sides would feel. In the field it is to start care and get these folks to the hospital.
It is about saving lives, not a lot about the grieving process for the families, there is no time to really speak of. In house you see the dynamics of families dealing with their love one's upcoming death. To say the least, no matter where a patient is, in the field or in house, it does take a toll on all us see a patient die. Just some of us have better coping skills. Well that's my fifty cents worth for today.-_-
 
I think that if the criteria outlined have all been met, a basic is quite capable of calling a code. Fortunately, I have not been in that situation personally. I am lucky enough to be part of a system where ALS is available 99.99% of the time. Basically, all hell would have to break out before I couldn't get a medic. In fact, the majority of the time, my partner is a medic. When I have another basic as my partner, all of the fire apparatus within the department I work for are ALS. Unfortunately, I realize it isn't like this everywhere.

As it is, in the last few weeks, I have been on more arrests than I care to count. Two we worked onscene long enough to get two rounds of drugs in, and then called onscene. There have also been a couple that we didn't work at all. One had just been down to long, the other had a DNR the family was able to produce. Of the 2 or 3 we did transport, one of them the family was very demanding, and it was apparent that not transporting was going to endanger us. There was PD onscene, but only one officer at that point, and he was very outnumbered. Yes, the patient was called pretty much as soon as we got to the ER, and the patient should have gotten two rounds of drugs onscene and then been called, but at that point our safety was more important.

On the patients we called and did not transport, we stayed onscene until we knew the chaplian was either onscene or only a couple minutes out. At that point, we focused on the family. It isn't a "fun" thing to do, but these runs basically come down to providing comfort to the family. They are the real patients. When you come in and don't start working the patient, or you stop after a few minutes, they know what is going on. The thing to remember is how you would want to be treated if you were in the family's shoes. Some will want their hand held, others want to talk, and others just require you to be there. Part of our job is knowing how to read people. As long as you are paying attention to your surroundings, you will be able to figure out the best approach with the family members you find onscene.

In my opinion, current EMS training breezes through death, dying, and grief. Like everything else about our current system, more education needs to be devoted to this. I am not saying we need to spend 2 months on it, but at the same time, the couple hours or class sessions that are devoted to it just don't seem adaquet. Having a better understanding of everything involved can only help when addressing families who have just lost someone.

This job really is all about compassion. When you find yourself unable to be compassionate for those around you, it is time to move on and find another profession.
 
Agreed. But this implies that the family is aware of impending death and has gathered around. Unlike those of us in EMS, most civilians especially in the US are not socially comfortable with death being a part of life (albeit the last part) They want that institutional involvement.

Hospice has been the best ally that I've seen. They give the family the skills to deal with the end of life but they are still only brought in on the minority of cases. Most family members will still dial 911 and insist on transport when the end comes. I can't count the number of calls I've gotten when the pt. has a valid P.O.L.S.T and there's nothing I can legally do for them. But, the family is there, looking helpless and wanting us to take the pt. in.

I work for a BLS agency and the state gives me few options for declaring in field death. I have protocols that state when I must call for ALS regardless of what my personal perception is on the efficacy of that action.

The study raises some valid points. It will be interesting to see how they play out in the real world.
 
This low survival rate is primarily due to the fact that very few bystanders in Canada provide CPR in the initial stages of cardiac arrest. In many cases, when CPR is performed the patient’s heart is more likely to attain a recoverable rhythm, which makes it easier to resuscitate the patient.

Here we have alot of bystanders that start CPR. So it is worked untill we get to the ED. Then let the Dr. in the ED make the choice. But I know that the no. of pts. that walk out of the Hospital is very few. But also alot of bystanders and providers for that case do not do CPR right. They always pump on the stomach in stead of the Heart.
 
I have had trauma arrests I wanted to call but the paramedics called them for us.
 
:o

"This low survival rate is primarily due to the fact that very few bystanders in Canada provide CPR in the initial stages of cardiac arrest"

I find that to be very disturbing.
 
"This low survival rate is primarily due to the fact that very few bystanders in Canada provide CPR in the initial stages of cardiac arrest"

I find that to be very disturbing.

It's not as if all that many of them provide CPR here. We need to educate the public on the importance of obtaining CPR certification and actually performing it in a cardiac arrest situation. As I tell anyone who asks me about CPR, "there's no way that we're going to save them if no one starts CPR before we get there."
 
I don't know what the percentage of U.S. or Canada is now, but I would imagine they are about the same. I do wonder why there has been a down size of classes and interest ?

I used to teach about 2 to 3 classes a month, if I do that a year I am lucky. I don;t even remember the last time we were asked to any group in regards to CPR. When having display, etc.. of CPR most people either ignore or make comments like .."yeah, I took it once"... Public attitude is very apathetic and I believe with t.v. shows, many have a false security that "shocking" and medications will save lives. When in reality only about 1 in 10,000 actually get a pulse back (not even a real save) much different than what is portrayed in television.

R/r 911
 
Don't you just LOVE those " T.V. trade shows!":wacko: It's like our job isn't hard enough. :wacko:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
interesting study, someone at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto should pass this onto our American surgeon general

iirc, and i'm not sure if it was the arc, or the aha, last cric was in include the family, not shoo them away from a code

this ties in with the fact that terminal illness here racks up it's greatest expense in the last 6 months of life.

the unisured aside, even the insured have troubles, thus working a full blown code for someone who meets the parameters via Sunnybrook becomes an economic decision for families that are having their loved ones expire in the home, more so now than when managed care was affordable

~S~
 
Back
Top