The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Advanced Cardiac Life Support in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: The Ontario Prehospital Advanced Life Support (OPALS) Study tested the incremental effect on the rate of survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of adding a program of advanced life support to a program of rapid defibrillation. METHODS: This multicenter, controlled clinical trial was conducted in 17 cities before and after advanced-life-support programs were instituted and enrolled 5638 patients who had had cardiac arrest outside the hospital. Of those patients, 1391 were enrolled during the rapid-defibrillation phase and 4247 during the subsequent advanced-life-support phase. Paramedics were trained in standard advanced life support, which includes endotracheal intubation and the administration of intravenous drugs. RESULTS: From the rapid-defibrillation phase to the advanced-life-support phase, the rate of admission to a hospital increased significantly (10.9 percent vs. 14.6 percent, P<0.001), but the rate of survival to hospital discharge did not (5.0 percent vs. 5.1 percent, P=0.83). The multivariate odds ratio for survival after advanced life support was 1.1 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.8 to 1.5); after an arrest witnessed by a bystander, 4.4 (95 percent confidence interval, 3.1 to 6.4); after cardiopulmonary resuscitation administered by a bystander, 3.7 (95 percent confidence interval, 2.5 to 5.4); and after rapid defibrillation, 3.4 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.4 to 8.4). There was no improvement in the rate of survival with the use of advanced life support in any subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of advanced-life-support interventions did not improve the rate of survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in a previously optimized emergency-medical-services system of rapid defibrillation. In order to save lives, health care planners should make cardiopulmonary resuscitation by citizens and rapid-defibrillation responses a priority for the resources of emergency-medical-services systems.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Al-Khatib, S. M., Stevenson, W. G., Ackerman, M. J., Bryant, W. J., Callans, D. J., Curtis, A. B., Deal, B. J., Dickfeld, T., Field, M. E., Fonarow, G. C., et al. (2018) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000548 · Cited by 412
The OPALS Major Trauma Study: impact of advanced life-support on survival and morbidity
Stiell, I. G., Nesbitt, L. P., Pickett, W., Munkley, D., Spaite, D. W., Banek, J., Field, B., Luinstra-Toohey, L., Maloney, J., Dreyer, J., et al. (2008) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.071154 · Cited by 266
Self-citationOut-of-hospital cardiac arrest: prehospital management
Ong, M. E. H., Perkins, G. D., & Cariou, A. (2018) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30316-7 · Cited by 226
A simple and valid tool distinguished efficacy from effectiveness studies
Gartlehner, G., Hansen, R. A., Nissman, D., Lohr, K. N., & Carey, T. S. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.01.011 · Cited by 207
Racial and ethnic differences in bystander CPR for witnessed cardiac arrest
Garcia, R. A., Spertus, J. A., Girotra, S., Nallamothu, B. K., Kennedy, K. F., McNally, B. F., Breathett, K., Del Rios, M., Sasson, C., & Chan, P. S. (2022) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2200798 · Cited by 163
Wisdom of the Crowd in Saving Lives: The Life Guardians App
Jaffe, E., Dadon, Z., & Alpert, E. A. (2018) · Prehospital and Disaster Medicine · doi:10.1017/s1049023x18000754 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Stiell, I. G., Wells, G. A., Field, B., Spaite, D. W., Nesbitt, L. P., De Maio, V. J., Nichol, G., Cousineau, D., Blackburn, J., Munkley, D., Luinstra-Toohey, L., Campeau, T., Dagnone, E., & Lyver, M.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2004-08-12
- Volume
- 351
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 647-656
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2145747838
- Cited by
- 835
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 57.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
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.