Clinical Analysis of Nontraumatic Prehospital Cardiac Arrest for Two Years.
- Author:
Han Deok YOON
;
Ju Kyong PARK
;
Yong Il MIN
- Publication Type:Original Article
- MeSH:
Ambulances;
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation;
Emergencies;
Emergency Medical Services;
Heart Arrest*;
Humans;
Korea;
Retrospective Studies;
Survival Rate
- From:Journal of the Korean Society of Emergency Medicine
1997;8(3):341-346
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Care for prehospital cardiac arrest is one of the major concerns of emergency medical services. But, in Korea, prehospital emergency medical service systems are not yet well established. We tried to offer one of the fundamental data for development of these systems. METHODS: After application of exclusion criteria, 183 patients who transferred to emergency center of our hospital after cardiac arrest in consecutive 24 months from Jan,1,1994 to Dec,31,1995 were included in this study. Retrospective review of the hospital charts of these patients was done. For statistical analysis, we divided patients to some categories. t-test or chi-square analysis was used. RESULTS: 24 patients of the 183 patients were secondary visitors(cardiac arrest was occurred during transfer from other hospitals), 159 patients were primary visitors. In the primary visitor group, only one third was ambulance visitors, and there is no statistical differences between arrest time of ambulance visitors and non-ambulance visitors(35+/-27 vs 37+/-24 min, p=NS). No organized bystander CPR was done. After arrival, 131 patients received CPR and 87 patients(66.4%) were not responded, 31 patients(23.1%) experienced transient ROSC, 13 patients(10.0%) survived until discharge, and only 2 patients(1.5%) were returned to their lives. CONCLUSION: We failed to find significant statistical survival differences between ambulance visitors and non-ambulance visitors, between presumed cardiac etiology group and non-cardiac etiology group. Survival rate was high in witnessed arrest group than unwitnessed arrest group(14.5% vs 2.1%, p=0.015).
