Temperature control in adults after cardiac arrest: a survey of current clinical practice in Germany

Standard

Temperature control in adults after cardiac arrest: a survey of current clinical practice in Germany. / Roedl, Kevin; Wolfrum, Sebastian; Michels, Guido; Pin, Martin; Söffker, Gerold; Janssens, Uwe; Kluge, Stefan.

in: CRIT CARE, Jahrgang 27, Nr. 1, 35, 23.01.2023.

Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/ZeitungSCORING: ZeitschriftenaufsatzForschungBegutachtung

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{fb1f0dd0da3242b087e820797a9c60c5,
title = "Temperature control in adults after cardiac arrest: a survey of current clinical practice in Germany",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Temperature control is recommended after out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) by international guidelines. This survey aimed to investigate current clinical practice and areas of uncertainty.METHODS: Online survey targeting members of three medical emergency and critical care societies in Germany (April 21-June 6, 2022) assessing post-cardiac arrest temperature control management.RESULTS: Of 341 completed questionnaires 28% (n = 97) used temperature control with normothermic target and 72% (n = 244) temperature control with hypothermic target. The definition of fever regarding patients with cardiac arrest ranged from ≥ 37.7 to 39.0 °C. Temperature control was mainly started in the ICU (80%, n = 273) and most commonly core cooling (74%, n = 254) and surface cooling (39%, n = 134) with feedback were used. Temperature control was maintained for 24 h in 18% (n = 61), 48 h in 28% (n = 94), 72 h in 42% (n = 143) and longer than 72 h in 13% (n = 43). 7% (n = 24) were using different protocols for OHCA with initial shockable and non-shockable rhythm. Additional 14% (n = 48) were using different temperature control protocols after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) compared with OHCA. Overall, 37% (n = 127) changed practice after the publication of the ERC-2021 guidelines and 33% (n = 114) after the recent publication of the revised ERC-ESICM guideline on temperature control.CONCLUSIONS: One-third of the respondents changed clinical practice since recent guideline update. However, a majority of physicians further trusts in temperature control with a hypothermic target. Of interest, 14% used different temperature control strategies after IHCA compared with OHCA and 7% for shockable and non-shockable initial rhythm. A more individualized approach in post resuscitation care may be warranted.",
author = "Kevin Roedl and Sebastian Wolfrum and Guido Michels and Martin Pin and Gerold S{\"o}ffker and Uwe Janssens and Stefan Kluge",
note = "{\textcopyright} 2023. The Author(s).",
year = "2023",
month = jan,
day = "23",
doi = "10.1186/s13054-023-04319-7",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
journal = "CRIT CARE",
issn = "1364-8535",
publisher = "Springer Science + Business Media",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Temperature control in adults after cardiac arrest: a survey of current clinical practice in Germany

AU - Roedl, Kevin

AU - Wolfrum, Sebastian

AU - Michels, Guido

AU - Pin, Martin

AU - Söffker, Gerold

AU - Janssens, Uwe

AU - Kluge, Stefan

N1 - © 2023. The Author(s).

PY - 2023/1/23

Y1 - 2023/1/23

N2 - BACKGROUND: Temperature control is recommended after out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) by international guidelines. This survey aimed to investigate current clinical practice and areas of uncertainty.METHODS: Online survey targeting members of three medical emergency and critical care societies in Germany (April 21-June 6, 2022) assessing post-cardiac arrest temperature control management.RESULTS: Of 341 completed questionnaires 28% (n = 97) used temperature control with normothermic target and 72% (n = 244) temperature control with hypothermic target. The definition of fever regarding patients with cardiac arrest ranged from ≥ 37.7 to 39.0 °C. Temperature control was mainly started in the ICU (80%, n = 273) and most commonly core cooling (74%, n = 254) and surface cooling (39%, n = 134) with feedback were used. Temperature control was maintained for 24 h in 18% (n = 61), 48 h in 28% (n = 94), 72 h in 42% (n = 143) and longer than 72 h in 13% (n = 43). 7% (n = 24) were using different protocols for OHCA with initial shockable and non-shockable rhythm. Additional 14% (n = 48) were using different temperature control protocols after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) compared with OHCA. Overall, 37% (n = 127) changed practice after the publication of the ERC-2021 guidelines and 33% (n = 114) after the recent publication of the revised ERC-ESICM guideline on temperature control.CONCLUSIONS: One-third of the respondents changed clinical practice since recent guideline update. However, a majority of physicians further trusts in temperature control with a hypothermic target. Of interest, 14% used different temperature control strategies after IHCA compared with OHCA and 7% for shockable and non-shockable initial rhythm. A more individualized approach in post resuscitation care may be warranted.

AB - BACKGROUND: Temperature control is recommended after out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) by international guidelines. This survey aimed to investigate current clinical practice and areas of uncertainty.METHODS: Online survey targeting members of three medical emergency and critical care societies in Germany (April 21-June 6, 2022) assessing post-cardiac arrest temperature control management.RESULTS: Of 341 completed questionnaires 28% (n = 97) used temperature control with normothermic target and 72% (n = 244) temperature control with hypothermic target. The definition of fever regarding patients with cardiac arrest ranged from ≥ 37.7 to 39.0 °C. Temperature control was mainly started in the ICU (80%, n = 273) and most commonly core cooling (74%, n = 254) and surface cooling (39%, n = 134) with feedback were used. Temperature control was maintained for 24 h in 18% (n = 61), 48 h in 28% (n = 94), 72 h in 42% (n = 143) and longer than 72 h in 13% (n = 43). 7% (n = 24) were using different protocols for OHCA with initial shockable and non-shockable rhythm. Additional 14% (n = 48) were using different temperature control protocols after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) compared with OHCA. Overall, 37% (n = 127) changed practice after the publication of the ERC-2021 guidelines and 33% (n = 114) after the recent publication of the revised ERC-ESICM guideline on temperature control.CONCLUSIONS: One-third of the respondents changed clinical practice since recent guideline update. However, a majority of physicians further trusts in temperature control with a hypothermic target. Of interest, 14% used different temperature control strategies after IHCA compared with OHCA and 7% for shockable and non-shockable initial rhythm. A more individualized approach in post resuscitation care may be warranted.

U2 - 10.1186/s13054-023-04319-7

DO - 10.1186/s13054-023-04319-7

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 36691075

VL - 27

JO - CRIT CARE

JF - CRIT CARE

SN - 1364-8535

IS - 1

M1 - 35

ER -