Cargando…

The Cardiac Arrest Support Tier: a service evaluation

AIM: This service evaluation seeks to determine whether the pre-hospital Cardiac Arrest Support Tier (CAST), implemented by a Hazardous Area Response Team (HART), was clinically effective, feasible and acceptable during its pilot year. METHODS: Chest compression feedback, provision of Return of Spon...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Metcalf, Matthew, Robinson, Matthew, Hall, Pippa, Goss, James
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The College of Paramedics 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7783951/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33456390
http://dx.doi.org/10.29045/14784726.2020.09.5.2.38
_version_ 1783632205156712448
author Metcalf, Matthew
Robinson, Matthew
Hall, Pippa
Goss, James
author_facet Metcalf, Matthew
Robinson, Matthew
Hall, Pippa
Goss, James
author_sort Metcalf, Matthew
collection PubMed
description AIM: This service evaluation seeks to determine whether the pre-hospital Cardiac Arrest Support Tier (CAST), implemented by a Hazardous Area Response Team (HART), was clinically effective, feasible and acceptable during its pilot year. METHODS: Chest compression feedback, provision of Return of Spontaneous Circulation (ROSC) care and CAST paramedic exposure to Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA) were audited. The number of incidents that CAST responded to and the number of staff it committed were also assessed. An online questionnaire was used to gauge acceptability of the project among frontline Ambulance Service Trust staff. RESULTS: CAST attended 178 OHCAs and committed a median of three (IQR 2–3) paramedics to each incident. In comparison to data from both South Western Ambulance Service Foundation Trust (SWASFT) and the National Ambulance Service in England, CAST delivered the full complement of post-ROSC care more frequently during the same period (CAST = 80% vs SWASFT = 68.5% vs England = 77.46%). CAST paramedics had a median exposure to 15.5 (IQR 12–19) OHCAs during the pilot year. Unfortunately, chest compression feedback was unavailable due to ongoing equipment inaccuracies and failure. Additionally 64.6% (n = 42/65) of SWASFT respondents believed CAST to be beneficial to resuscitation attempts, 63.1% (n = 41/65) would like CAST to continue to support resuscitation attempts in the future and 55.6% (n = 35/63) felt supported by CAST staff on scene. CONCLUSION: CAST is logistically feasible, is acceptable to the majority of SWASFT staff and demonstrated the successful delivery of evidence-based practice (EBP) to OHCA incidents.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7783951
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher The College of Paramedics
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77839512021-09-01 The Cardiac Arrest Support Tier: a service evaluation Metcalf, Matthew Robinson, Matthew Hall, Pippa Goss, James Br Paramed J Service Evaluation AIM: This service evaluation seeks to determine whether the pre-hospital Cardiac Arrest Support Tier (CAST), implemented by a Hazardous Area Response Team (HART), was clinically effective, feasible and acceptable during its pilot year. METHODS: Chest compression feedback, provision of Return of Spontaneous Circulation (ROSC) care and CAST paramedic exposure to Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA) were audited. The number of incidents that CAST responded to and the number of staff it committed were also assessed. An online questionnaire was used to gauge acceptability of the project among frontline Ambulance Service Trust staff. RESULTS: CAST attended 178 OHCAs and committed a median of three (IQR 2–3) paramedics to each incident. In comparison to data from both South Western Ambulance Service Foundation Trust (SWASFT) and the National Ambulance Service in England, CAST delivered the full complement of post-ROSC care more frequently during the same period (CAST = 80% vs SWASFT = 68.5% vs England = 77.46%). CAST paramedics had a median exposure to 15.5 (IQR 12–19) OHCAs during the pilot year. Unfortunately, chest compression feedback was unavailable due to ongoing equipment inaccuracies and failure. Additionally 64.6% (n = 42/65) of SWASFT respondents believed CAST to be beneficial to resuscitation attempts, 63.1% (n = 41/65) would like CAST to continue to support resuscitation attempts in the future and 55.6% (n = 35/63) felt supported by CAST staff on scene. CONCLUSION: CAST is logistically feasible, is acceptable to the majority of SWASFT staff and demonstrated the successful delivery of evidence-based practice (EBP) to OHCA incidents. The College of Paramedics 2020-09-01 2020-09-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7783951/ /pubmed/33456390 http://dx.doi.org/10.29045/14784726.2020.09.5.2.38 Text en © 2020 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Service Evaluation
Metcalf, Matthew
Robinson, Matthew
Hall, Pippa
Goss, James
The Cardiac Arrest Support Tier: a service evaluation
title The Cardiac Arrest Support Tier: a service evaluation
title_full The Cardiac Arrest Support Tier: a service evaluation
title_fullStr The Cardiac Arrest Support Tier: a service evaluation
title_full_unstemmed The Cardiac Arrest Support Tier: a service evaluation
title_short The Cardiac Arrest Support Tier: a service evaluation
title_sort cardiac arrest support tier: a service evaluation
topic Service Evaluation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7783951/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33456390
http://dx.doi.org/10.29045/14784726.2020.09.5.2.38
work_keys_str_mv AT metcalfmatthew thecardiacarrestsupporttieraserviceevaluation
AT robinsonmatthew thecardiacarrestsupporttieraserviceevaluation
AT hallpippa thecardiacarrestsupporttieraserviceevaluation
AT gossjames thecardiacarrestsupporttieraserviceevaluation
AT metcalfmatthew cardiacarrestsupporttieraserviceevaluation
AT robinsonmatthew cardiacarrestsupporttieraserviceevaluation
AT hallpippa cardiacarrestsupporttieraserviceevaluation
AT gossjames cardiacarrestsupporttieraserviceevaluation