Author
Listed:
- Robert S Phillips
- Bryonnie Scott
- Simon J Carter
- Matthew Taylor
- Eleanor Peirce
- Patrick Davies
- Ian K Maconochie
Abstract
Background: Cardiopulmonary arrest in children is an uncommon event, and often fatal. Resuscitation is often attempted, but at what point, and under what circumstances do continued attempts to re-establish circulation become futile? The uncertainty around these questions can lead to unintended distress to the family and to the resuscitation team. Objectives: To define the likely outcomes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation in children, within different patient groups, related to clinical features. Data Sources: MEDLINE, MEDLINE in-Process & Other non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, Cochrane database of systematic reviews and Cochrane central register of trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), the Health Technology Assessment database, along with reference lists of relevant systematic reviews and included articles. Study Eligibility Criteria: Prospective cohort studies which derive or validate a clinical prediction model of outcome following cardiopulmonary arrest. Participants and Interventions: Children or young people (aged 0 – 18 years) who had cardiopulmonary arrest and received an attempt at resuscitation, excluding resuscitation at birth. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods: Risk of bias assessment developed the Hayden system for non-randomised studies and QUADAS2 for decision rules. Synthesis undertaken by narrative, and random effects meta-analysis with the DerSimonian-Laird estimator. Results: More than 18,000 episodes in 16 data sets were reported. Meta-analysis was possible for survival and one neurological outcome; others were reported too inconsistently. In-hospital patients (average survival 37.2% (95% CI 23.7 to 53.0%)) have a better chance of survival following cardiopulmonary arrest than out-of-hospital arrests (5.8% (95% CI 3.9% to 8.6%)). Better neurological outcome was also seen, but data were too scarce for meta-analysis (17% to 71% ‘good’ outcomes, compared with 2.8% to 3.2%). Limitation: Lack of consistent outcome reporting and short-term neurological outcome measures limited the strength of conclusions that can be drawn from this review. Conclusions and Implications of Key Findings: There is a need to collaboratively, prospectively, collect potentially predictive data on these rare events to understand more clearly the predictors of survival and long-term neurological outcome. Systematic Review Registration Number: PROSPERO 2013:CRD42013005102
Suggested Citation
Robert S Phillips & Bryonnie Scott & Simon J Carter & Matthew Taylor & Eleanor Peirce & Patrick Davies & Ian K Maconochie, 2015.
"Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Outcomes after Cardiopulmonary Arrest in Childhood,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0130327
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130327
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0130327. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.