Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 516

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Minimally Interrupted Cardiac Resuscitation by Emergency Medical Services for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Bobrow, Bentley J.·2008·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a major public health problem. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the survival of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest would improve with minimally interrupted cardiac resuscitation (MICR), an alternate emergency medical services (EMS) protocol. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: A prospective study of survival-to-hospital discharge between January 1, 2005, and November 22, 2007. Patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrests in 2 metropolitan cities in Arizona before and after MICR training of fire department emergency medical personnel were assessed. In a second analysis of protocol compliance, patients from the 2 metropolitan cities and 60 additional fire departments in Arizona who actually received MICR were compared with patients who did not receive MICR but received standard advanced life support. INTERVENTION: Instruction for EMS personnel in MICR, an approach that includes an initial series of 200 uninterrupted chest compressions, rhythm analysis with a single shock, 200 immediate postshock chest compressions before pulse check or rhythm reanalysis, early administration of epinephrine, and delayed endotracheal intubation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Survival-to-hospital discharge. RESULTS: Among the 886 patients in the 2 metropolitan cities, survival-to-hospital discharge increased from 1.8% (4/218) before MICR training to 5.4% (36/668) after MICR training (odds ratio [OR], 3.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-8.9). In the subgroup of 174 patients with witnessed cardiac arrest and ventricular fibrillation, survival increased from 4.7% (2/43) before MICR training to 17.6% (23/131) after MICR training (OR, 8.6; 95% CI, 1.8-42.0). In the analysis of MICR protocol compliance involving 2460 patients with cardiac arrest, survival was significantly better among patients who received MICR than those who did not (9.1% [60/661] vs 3.8% [69/1799]; OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.9-4.1), as well as patients with witnessed ventricular fibrillation (28.4% [40/141] vs 11.9% [46/387]; OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 2.0-5.8). CONCLUSIONS: Survival-to-hospital discharge of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest increased after implementation of MICR as an alternate EMS protocol. These results need to be confirmed in a randomized trial.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.299.10.1158

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 23 references

Cited by

See all 516

Metadata

Authors
Bobrow, B. J.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2008-03-12
Volume
299
Issue
10
Pages
1158
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2135255941
Cited by
516
References
23
FWCI
64.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Minimally Interrupted Cardiac Resuscitation by Emergency Medical Services for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.299.10.1158
The paper
Bobrow, B. J. (2008). Minimally Interrupted Cardiac Resuscitation by Emergency Medical Services for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.299.10.1158

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.