METHODS: A cross-sectional descriptive survey addressing population characteristics, DS structures and levels of service, state of DACPR implementation (including protocols and quality improvement programs) among PAROS DS's.
RESULTS: 9 DS's responded, representing a total of 23 dispatch centres from 9 countries that serve over 80 million people. Most PAROS DS's operate a tiered dispatch response, have implemented medical oversight, and tend to be staffed by dispatchers with a predominantly medical background. Almost all PAROS DS's have begun tracking key EMS indicators. 77.8% (n = 7) of PAROS DS's have introduced DACPR. Of the DS's that have rolled out DACPR, 71.4% (n = 5) provided instructions in over one language. All DS's that implemented DACPR and provided feedback to dispatchers offered feedback on missed OHCA recognition. The majority of DS's (83.3%; n = 5) that offered DACPR and provided feedback to dispatchers also implemented corrective feedback, while 66.7% (n = 4) offered positive feedback. Compression-only CPR was the standard instruction for PAROS DS's. OHCA recognition sensitivity varied widely in PAROS DS's, ranging from 32.6% (95% CI: 29.9-35.5%) to 79.2% (95% CI: 72.9-84.4%). Median time to first compression ranged from 120 s to 220 s.
CONCLUSIONS: We found notable variations in characteristics and state of DACPR implementation between PAROS DS's. These findings will lay the groundwork for future DS and DACPR studies in the PAROS network.
METHODS: This was a three-arm, prospective, multi-national, population-based, community-level, implementation trial. Cases between January 2009 and June 2018 from the Pan-Asian Resuscitation Outcomes Study were included. Sites either implemented a comprehensive (with quality improvement tool) or a basic DA-CPR package, or served as controls. Primary outcome was survival-to-discharge/30th day post-arrest. Secondary outcomes were BCPR and favorable neurological outcome. A before-after comparison was made within each country; this before-after change was then compared across the three groups using logistic regression.
RESULTS: 170,687 cases were analyzed. Before-after comparison showed that survival to discharge was higher in the 'implementation' period in all three groups: comprehensive odds ratio (OR) 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI; [1.0-1.19]); basic OR 1.14, 95% CI (1.08-1.2); and control OR 1.25, 95% CI (1.02-1.53). Comparing between groups, the comprehensive group had significantly higher change in BCPR (comprehensive vs control ratio of OR 1.86, 95% CI [1.66-2.09]; basic vs control ratio of OR 0.94, 95% CI [0.85-1.05]; and comprehensive vs basic ratio of OR 1.97, 95% CI [1.87-2.08]) and survival with favorable neurological outcome (comprehensive vs basic ratio of OR 1.2, 95% CI [1.04-1.39]).
CONCLUSION: We evaluated the impact of a DA-CPR program across heterogeneous EMS systems and demonstrated that a comprehensive DA-CPR program had the most impact on BCPR and favorable neurological outcome.
METHODS: This was a prospective, international, multicenter cohort study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the Asia-Pacific. Arrests caused by trauma, patients who were not transported by emergency medical services (EMS), and pediatric out-of-hospital cardiac arrest cases (<18 years) were excluded from the analysis. Modifiable out-of-hospital factors (bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR] and defibrillation, out-of-hospital defibrillation, advanced airway, and drug administration) were compared for all out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients presenting to EMS and participating hospitals. The primary outcome measure was survival to hospital discharge or 30 days of hospitalization (if not discharged). We used multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression models to identify factors independently associated with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival, accounting for clustering within each community.
RESULTS: Of 66,780 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest cases reported between January 2009 and December 2012, we included 56,765 in the analysis. In the adjusted model, modifiable factors associated with improved out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes included bystander CPR (odds ratio [OR] 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31 to 1.55), response time less than or equal to 8 minutes (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.35 to 1.71), and out-of-hospital defibrillation (OR 2.31; 95% CI 1.96 to 2.72). Out-of-hospital advanced airway (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.80) was negatively associated with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival.
CONCLUSION: In the PAROS cohort, bystander CPR, out-of-hospital defibrillation, and response time less than or equal to 8 minutes were positively associated with increased out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival, whereas out-of-hospital advanced airway was associated with decreased out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival. Developing EMS systems should focus on basic life support interventions in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest resuscitation.
METHODS: Traumatic cardiac arrest patients from 13 countries in the Pan-Asian Resuscitation Outcomes Study registry from 2009 to 2018 were analyzed. Multilevel logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with the primary outcomes of survival to hospital discharge and favorable neurological outcome (Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) 1-2), and the secondary outcome of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC).
RESULTS: There were 207,455 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest cases, of which 13,631 (6.6%) were trauma patients aged 18 years and above with resuscitation attempted and who had survival outcomes reported. The median age was 57 years (interquartile range 39-73), 23.0% received bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), 1750 (12.8%) had ROSC, 461 (3.4%) survived to discharge, and 131 (1.0%) had CPC 1-2. Factors associated with higher rates of survival to discharge and favorable neurological outcome were arrests witnessed by emergency medical services or private ambulances (survival to discharge adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 2.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.99-4.38; CPC 1-2 aOR = 2.57, 95% CI = 1.25-5.27), bystander CPR (survival to discharge aOR = 2.16; 95% CI 1.71-2.72; CPC 1-2 aOR = 4.98, 95% CI = 3.27-7.57), and initial shockable rhythm (survival to discharge aOR = 12.00; 95% CI = 6.80-21.17; CPC 1-2 aOR = 33.28, 95% CI = 11.39-97.23) or initial pulseless electrical activity (survival to discharge aOR = 3.98; 95% CI = 2.99-5.30; CPC 1-2 aOR = 5.67, 95% CI = 3.05-10.53) relative to asystole.
CONCLUSIONS: In traumatic cardiac arrest, early aggressive resuscitation may not be futile and bystander CPR may improve outcomes.
METHODS: The two entities organised a combined symposium and post-meeting interactions among representatives of major cancer centres from seventeen Asian countries to outlining major challenges and countermeasures.
RESULTS: Participating stakeholders distilled five big questions. 1) "Will there be an explosion of late-stage cancers after the pandemic?" To address and recover from perceived delayed prevention, screening, treatment and care challenges, collaboration of key stakeholders in the region and alignment in cancer care management, policy intervention and cancer registry initiatives would be of essential value. 2) "Operations and Finance" The pandemic has resulted in significant material and financial casualties. Flagged acute challenges (shortages of supplies, imposition of lockdown) as well as longer-standing reduction of financial revenue, manpower, international collaboration, and training should also be addressed. 3) "Will telemedicine and technological innovations revolutionize cancer care?" Deploying and implementing telemedicine such as teleconsultation and virtual tumour boards were considered invaluable. These innovations could become a new regular practice, leading to expansion of tele-collaboration through collaboration of institutions in the region. 4) "Will virtual conferences continue after the pandemic?" Virtual conferences during the pandemic have opened new doors for knowledge sharing, especially for representatives of low- and middle-income countries in the region, while saving time and costs of travel. 5) "How do we prepare for the next pandemic or international emergency?" Roadmaps for action to improve access to appropriate patient care and research were identified and scrutinised.
CONCLUSION: Through addressing these five big questions, focused collaboration among members and with international organisations such as City Cancer Challenge will allow enhanced preparedness for future international emergencies.
.
OBJECTIVE: The objectives are to (1) establish an international cohort of affected and unaffected individuals with PD-linked variants; (2) provide harmonized and quality-controlled clinical characterization data for each included individual; and (3) further promote collaboration of researchers in the field of monogenic PD.
METHODS: We conducted a worldwide, systematic online survey to collect individual-level data on individuals with PD-linked variants in SNCA, LRRK2, VPS35, PRKN, PINK1, DJ-1, as well as selected pathogenic and risk variants in GBA and corresponding demographic, clinical, and genetic data. All registered cases underwent thorough quality checks, and pathogenicity scoring of the variants and genotype-phenotype relationships were analyzed.
RESULTS: We collected 3888 variant carriers for our analyses, reported by 92 centers (42 countries) worldwide. Of the included individuals, 3185 had a diagnosis of PD (ie, 1306 LRRK2, 115 SNCA, 23 VPS35, 429 PRKN, 75 PINK1, 13 DJ-1, and 1224 GBA) and 703 were unaffected (ie, 328 LRRK2, 32 SNCA, 3 VPS35, 1 PRKN, 1 PINK1, and 338 GBA). In total, we identified 269 different pathogenic variants; 1322 individuals in our cohort (34%) were indicated as not previously published.
CONCLUSIONS: Within the MJFF Global Genetic PD Study Group, we (1) established the largest international cohort of affected and unaffected individuals carrying PD-linked variants; (2) provide harmonized and quality-controlled clinical and genetic data for each included individual; (3) promote collaboration in the field of genetic PD with a view toward clinical and genetic stratification of patients for gene-targeted clinical trials. © 2023 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.