Part 1: Executive Summary: 2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.

Abstract

HomeCirculationVol. 132, No. 18_suppl_2Part 1: Executive Summary Free AccessResearch ArticlePDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessResearch ArticlePDF/EPUBPart 1: Executive Summary2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Robert W. Neumar, Michael Shuster, Clifton W. Callaway, Lana M. Gent, Dianne L. Atkins, Farhan Bhanji, Steven C. Brooks, Allan R. de Caen, Michael W. Donnino, Jose Maria E. Ferrer, Monica E. Kleinman, Steven L. Kronick, Eric J. Lavonas, Mark S. Link, Mary E. Mancini, Laurie J. Morrison, Robert E. O’Connor, Ricardo A. Samson, Steven M. Schexnayder, Eunice M. Singletary, Elizabeth H. Sinz, Andrew H. Travers, Myra H. Wyckoff and Mary Fran Hazinski Robert W. NeumarRobert W. Neumar Search for more papers by this author , Michael ShusterMichael Shuster Search for more papers by this author , Clifton W. CallawayClifton W. Callaway Search for more papers by this author , Lana M. GentLana M. Gent Search for more papers by this author , Dianne L. AtkinsDianne L. Atkins Search for more papers by this author , Farhan BhanjiFarhan Bhanji Search for more papers by this author , Steven C. BrooksSteven C. Brooks Search for more papers by this author , Allan R. de CaenAllan R. de Caen Search for more papers by this author , Michael W. DonninoMichael W. Donnino Search for more papers by this author , Jose Maria E. FerrerJose Maria E. Ferrer Search for more papers by this author , Monica E. KleinmanMonica E. Kleinman Search for more papers by this author , Steven L. KronickSteven L. Kronick Search for more papers by this author , Eric J. LavonasEric J. Lavonas Search for more papers by this author , Mark S. LinkMark S. Link Search for more papers by this author , Mary E. ManciniMary E. Mancini Search for more papers by this author , Laurie J. MorrisonLaurie J. Morrison Search for more papers by this author , Robert E. O’ConnorRobert E. O’Connor Search for more papers by this author , Ricardo A. SamsonRicardo A. Samson Search for more papers by this author , Steven M. SchexnayderSteven M. Schexnayder Search for more papers by this author , Eunice M. SingletaryEunice M. Singletary Search for more papers by this author , Elizabeth H. SinzElizabeth H. Sinz Search for more papers by this author , Andrew H. TraversAndrew H. Travers Search for more papers by this author , Myra H. WyckoffMyra H. Wyckoff Search for more papers by this author and Mary Fran HazinskiMary Fran Hazinski Search for more papers by this author Originally published3 Nov 2015https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000252Circulation. 2015;132:S315–S367IntroductionPublication of the 2015 American Heart Association (AHA) Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Emergency Cardiovascular Care (ECC) marks 49 years since the first CPR guidelines were published in 1966 by an Ad Hoc Committee on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation established by the National Academy of Sciences of the National Research Council.1 Since that time, periodic revisions to the Guidelines have been published by the AHA in 1974,2 1980,3 1986,4 1992,5 2000,6 2005,7 2010,8 and now 2015. The 2010 AHA Guidelines for CPR and ECC provided a comprehensive review of evidence-based recommendations for resuscitation, ECC, and first aid. The 2015 AHA Guidelines Update for CPR and ECC focuses on topics with significant new science or ongoing controversy, and so serves as an update to the 2010 AHA Guidelines for CPR and ECC rather than a complete revision of the Guidelines.The purpose of this Executive Summary is to provide an overview of the new or revised recommendations contained in the 2015 Guidelines Update. This document does not contain extensive reference citations; the reader is referred to Parts 3 through 9 for more detailed review of the scientific evidence and the recommendations on which they are based.There have been several changes to the organization of the 2015 Guidelines Update compared with 2010. “Part 4: Systems of Care and Continuous Quality Improvement” is an important new Part that focuses on the integrated structures and processes that are necessary to create systems of care for both in-hospital and out-of-hospital resuscitation capable of measuring and improving quality and patient outcomes. This Part replaces the “CPR Overview” Part of the 2010 Guidelines.Another new Part of the 2015 Guidelines Update is “Part 14: Education,” which focuses on evidence-based recommendations to facilitate widespread, consistent, efficient and effective implementation of the AHA Guidelines for CPR and ECC into practice. These recommendations will target resuscitation education of both lay rescuers and healthcare providers. This Part replaces the 2010 Part titled “Education, Implementation, and Teams.” The 2015 Guidelines Update does not include a separate Part on adult stroke because the content would replicate that already offered in the most recent AHA/American Stroke Association guidelines for the management of acute stroke.9,10Finally, the 2015 Guidelines Update marks the beginning of a new era for the AHA Guidelines for CPR and ECC, because the Guidelines will transition from a 5-year cycle of periodic revisions and updates to a Web-based format that is continuously updated. The first release of the Web-based integrated Guidelines, now available online at ECCguidelines.heart.org is based on the comprehensive 2010 Guidelines plus the 2015 Guidelines Update. Moving forward, these Guidelines will be updated by using a continuous evidence evaluation process to facilitate more rapid translation of new scientific discoveries into daily patient care.Creation of practice guidelines is only 1 link in the chain of knowledge translation that starts with laboratory and clinical science and culminates in improved patient outcomes. The AHA ECC Committee has set an impact goal of doubling bystander CPR rates and doubling cardiac arrest survival by 2020. Much work will be needed across the entire spectrum of knowledge translation to reach this important goal.Evidence Review and Guidelines Development ProcessThe process used to generate the 2015 AHA Guidelines Update for CPR and ECC was significantly different from the process used in prior releases of the Guidelines, and marks the planned transition from a 5-year cycle of evidence review to a continuous evidence evaluation process. The AHA continues to partner with the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) in the evidence review process. However, for 2015, ILCOR prioritized topics for systematic review based on clinical significance and availability of new evidence. Each priority topic was defined as a question in PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) format. Many of the topics reviewed in 2010 did not have new published evidence or controversial aspects, so they were not rereviewed in 2015. In 2015, 165 PICO questions were addressed by systematic reviews, whereas in 2010, 274 PICO questions were addressed by evidence evaluation. In addition, ILCOR adopted the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) process for evidence evaluation and expanded the opportunity for public comment. The output of the GRADE process was used to generate the 2015 International Consensus on CPR and ECC Science With Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR).11,12The recommendations of the ILCOR 2015 CoSTR were used to inform the recommendations in the 2015 AHA Guidelines Update for CPR and ECC. The wording of these recommendations is based on the AHA classification system for evidentiary review (see “Part 2: Evidence Evaluation and Management of Conflicts of Interest”).The 2015 AHA Guidelines Update for CPR and ECC contains 315 classified recommendations. There are 78 Class I recommendations (25%), 217 Class II recommendations (68%), and 20 Class III recommendations (7%). Overall, 3 (1%) are based on Level of Evidence (LOE) A, 50 (15%) are based on LOE B-R (randomized studies), 46 (15%) are based on LOE B-NR (nonrandomized studies), 145 (46%) are based on LOE C-LD (limited data), and 73 (23%) are based on LOE C-EO (consensus of expert opinion). These results highlight the persistent knowledge gap in resuscitation science that needs to be addressed through expanded research initiatives and funding opportunities.As noted above, the transition from a 5-year cycle to a continuous evidence evaluation and Guidelines update process will be initiated by the 2015 online publication of the AHA Integrated Guidelines for CPR and ECC at ECCguidelines.heart.org. The initial content will be a compilation of the 2010 Guidelines and the 2015 Guidelines Update. In the future, the Scientific Evidence Evaluation and Review System (SEERS) Web-based resource will also be periodically updated with results of the ILCOR continuous evidence evaluation process at www.ilcor.org/seers.Part 3: Ethical IssuesAs resuscitation practice evolves, ethical considerations must also evolve. Managing the multiple decisions associated with resuscitation is challenging from many perspectives, especially when healthcare providers are dealing with the ethics surrounding decisions to provide or withhold emergency cardiovascular interventions.Ethical issues surrounding resuscitation are complex and vary across settings (in or out of hospital), providers (basic or advanced), patient population (neonatal, pediatric, or adult), and whether to start or when to terminate CPR. Although the ethical principles involved have not changed dramatically since the 2010 Guidelines were published, the data that inform many ethical discussions have been updated through the evidence review process. The 2015 ILCOR evidence review process and resultant 2015 Guidelines Update include several recommendations that have implications for ethical decision making in these challenging areas.Significant New and Updated Recommendations That May Inform Ethical DecisionsThe use of extracorporeal CPR (ECPR) for cardiac arrestIntra-arrest prognostic factors for infants, children, and adultsPrognostication for newborns, infants, children, and adults after cardiac arrestFunction of transplanted organs recovered after cardiac arrestNew resuscitation strategies, such as ECPR, have made the decision to discontinue cardiac arrest measures more complicated (see “Part 6: Alternative Techniques and Ancillary Devices for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation” and “Part 7: Adult Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support”). Understanding the appropriate use, implications, and likely benefits related to such new treatments will have an impact on decision making. There is new information regarding prognostication for newborns, infants, children, and adults with cardiac arrest and/or after cardiac arrest (see “Part 13: Neonatal Resuscitation,” “Part 12: Pediatric Advanced Life Support,” and “Part 8: Post–Cardiac Arrest Care”). The increased use of targeted temperature management has led to new challenges for predicting neurologic outcomes in comatose post–cardiac arrest patients, and the latest data about the accuracy of particular tests and studies should be used to guide decisions about goals of care and limiting interventions.With new information about the success rate for transplanted organs obtained from victims of cardiac arrest, there is ongoing discussion about the ethical implications around organ donation in an emergency setting. Some of the different viewpoints on important ethical concerns are summarized in “Part 3: Ethical Issues.” There is also an enhanced awareness that although children and adolescents cannot make legally binding decisions, information should be shared with them to the extent possible, using appropriate language and information for their level of development. Finally, the phrase “limitations of care” has been changed to “limitations of interventions,” and there is increasing availability of the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) form, a new method of legally identifying people who wish to have specific limits on interventions at the end of life, both in and out of healthcare facilities.Part 4: Systems of Care and Continuous Quality ImprovementAlmost all aspects of resuscitation, from recognition of cardiopulmonary compromise, through cardiac arrest and resuscitation and post–cardiac arrest care, to the return to productive life, can be discussed in terms of a system or systems of care. Systems of care consist of multiple working parts that are interdependent, each having an effect on every other aspect of the care within that system. To bring about any improvement, providers must recognize the interdependency of the various parts of the system. There is also increasing recognition that out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) systems of care must function differently. “Part 4: Systems of Care and Continuous Quality Improvement” in this 2015 Guidelines Update makes a clear distinction between the two systems, noting that OHCA frequently is the result of an unexpected event with a reactive element, whereas the focus on IHCA is shifting from reactive resuscitation to prevention. New Chains of Survival are suggested for in-hospital and out-of-hospital systems of care, with relatively recent in-hospital focus on prevention of arrests. Additional emphasis should be on continuous quality improvement by identifying the problem that is limiting survival, and then by setting goals, measuring progress toward those goals, creating accountability, and having a method to effect change in order to improve outcomes.This new Part of the AHA Guidelines for CPR and ECC summarizes the evidence reviewed in 2015 with a focus on the systems of care for both IHCA and OHCA, and it lays the framework for future efforts to improve these systems of care. A universal taxonomy of systems of care is proposed for stakeholders. There are evidence-based recommendations on how to improve these systems.Significant New and Updated RecommendationsIn a randomized trial, social media was used by dispatchers to notify nearby potential rescuers of a possible cardiac arrest. Although few patients ultimately received CPR from volunteers dispatched by the notification system, there was a higher rate of bystander-initiated CPR (62% versus 48% in the control group).13 Given the low risk of harm and the potential benefit of such notifications, municipalities could consider incorporating these technologies into their OHCA system of care. It may be reasonable for communities to incorporate, where available, social media technologies that summon rescuers who are willing and able to perform CPR and are in close proximity to a suspected victim of OHCA (Class IIb, LOE B-R).Specialized cardiac arrest centers can provide comprehensive care to patients after resuscitation from cardiac arrest. These specialized centers have been proposed, and new evidence suggests that a regionalized approach to OHCA resuscitation may be considered that includes the use of cardiac resuscitation centers.A variety of early warning scores are available to help identify adult and pediatric patients at risk for deterioration. Medical emergency teams or rapid response teams have been developed to help respond to patients who are deteriorating. Use of scoring systems to identify these patients and creation of teams to respond to those scores or other indicators of deterioration may be considered, particularly on general care wards for adults and for children with high-risk illnesses, and may help reduce the incidence of cardiac arrest.Evidence regarding the use of public access defibrillation was reviewed, and the use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs) by laypersons continues to improve survival from OHCA. We continue to recommend implementation of public access defibrillation programs for treatment of patients with OHCA in communities who have persons at risk for cardiac arrest.Knowledge GapsWhat is the optimal model for rapid response teams in the prevention of IHCA, and is there evidence that rapid response teams improve outcomes?What are the most effective methods for increasing bystander CPR for OHCA?What is the best composition for a team that responds to IHCA, and what is the most appropriate training for that team?Part 5: Adult Basic Life Support and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation QualityNew Developments in Basic Life Support Science Since 2010The 2010 Guidelines were most notable for the reorientation of the universal sequence from A-B-C (Airway, Breathing, Compressions) to C-A-B (Compressions, Airway, Breathing) to minimize time to initiation of chest compressions. Since 2010, the importance of high-quality chest compressions has been reemphasized, and targets for compression rate and depth have been further refined by relevant evidence. For the untrained lay rescuer, dispatchers play a key role in the recognition of abnormal breathing or agonal gasps as signs of cardiac arrest, with recommendations for chest compression–only CPR.This section presents the updated recommendations for the 2015 adult basic life support (BLS) guidelines for lay rescuers and healthcare providers. Key changes and continued points of emphasis in this 2015 Guidelines Update include the following: The crucial links in the adult Chain of Survival for OHCA are unchanged from 2010; however, there is increased emphasis on the rapid identification of potential cardiac arrest by dispatchers, with immediate provision of CPR instructions to the caller. These Guidelines take into consideration the ubiquitous presence of mobile phones that can allow the rescuer to activate the emergency response system without leaving the victim’s side. For healthcare providers, these recommendations allow flexibility for activation of the emergency response to better match the provider’s clinical setting. More data are available indicating that high-quality CPR improves survival from cardiac arrest. Components of high-quality CPR includeEnsuring chest compressions of adequate rateEnsuring chest compressions of adequate depthAllowing full chest recoil between compressionsMinimizing interruptions in chest compressionsAvoiding excessive ventilationRecommendations are made for a simultaneous, choreographed approach to performance of chest compressions, airway management, rescue breathing, rhythm detection, and shock delivery (if indicated) by an integrated team of highly trained rescuers in applicable settings.Significant New and Updated RecommendationsMany studies have documented that the most common errors of resuscitation are inadequate compression rate and depth; both errors may reduce survival. New to this 2015 Guidelines Update are upper limits of recommended compression rate based on preliminary data suggesting that excessive rate may be associated with lower rate of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). In addition, an upper limit of compression depth is introduced based on a report associating increased non–life-threatening injuries with excessive compression depth.In adult victims of cardiac arrest, it is reasonable for rescuers to perform chest compressions at a rate of 100 to 120/min (Class IIa, LOE C-LD). The addition of an upper limit of compression rate is the result of 1 large registry study associating extremely rapid compression rates with inadequate compression depth.During manual CPR, rescuers should perform chest compressions at a depth of at least 2 inches or 5 cm for an average adult, while avoiding excessive chest compression depths (greater than 2.4 inches [6 cm]) (Class I, LOE C-LD). The addition of an upper limit of compression depth followed review of 1 publication suggesting potential harm from excessive chest compression depth (greater than 6 cm, or 2.4 inches). Compression depth may be difficult to judge without use of feedback devices, and identification of upper limits of compression depth may be challenging.In adult cardiac arrest, total preshock and postshock pauses in chest compressions should be as short as possible (Class I, LOE C-LD) because shorter pauses can be associated with greater shock success, ROSC, and, in some studies, higher survival to hospital discharge. The need to reduce such pauses has received greater emphasis in this 2015 Guidelines Update.In adult cardiac arrest with an unprotected airway, it may be reasonable to perform CPR with the goal of a chest compression fraction as high as possible, with a target of at least 60% (Class IIb, LOE C-LD). The addition of this target compression fraction to the 2015 Guidelines Update is intended to limit interruptions in compressions and to maximize coronary perfusion and blood flow during CPR.For patients with known or suspected opioid addiction who have a definite pulse but no normal breathing or only gasping (ie, a respiratory arrest), in addition to providing standard BLS care, it is reasonable for appropriately trained BLS providers to administer intramuscular or intranasal naloxone (Class IIa, LOE C-LD). It is reasonable to provide opioid overdose response education with or without naloxone distribution to persons at risk for opioid overdose in any setting (Class IIa, LOE C-LD). For more information, see “Part 10: Special Circumstances of Resuscitation.”For witnessed OHCA with a shockable rhythm, it may be reasonable for emergency medical service (EMS) systems with priority-based, multi-tiered response to delay positive-pressure ventilation by using a strategy of up to 3 cycles of 200 continuous compressions with passive oxygen insufflation and airway adjuncts (Class IIb, LOE C-LD).We do not recommend the routine use of passive ventilation techniques during conventional CPR for adults, because the usefulness/effectiveness of these techniques is unknown (Class IIb, LOE C-EO). However, in EMS systems that use bundles of care involving continuous chest compressions, the use of passive ventilation techniques may be considered as part of that bundle (Class IIb, LOE C-LD).It is recommended that emergency dispatchers determine if a patient is unconscious with abnormal breathing after acquiring the requisite information to determine the location of the event (Class I, LOE C-LD).If the patient is unconscious with abnormal or absent breathing, it is reasonable for the emergency dispatcher to assume that the patient is in cardiac arrest (Class IIa, LOE C-LD).Dispatchers should be educated to identify unconsciousness with abnormal and agonal gasps across a range of clinical presentations and descriptions (Class I, LOE C-LD).We recommend that dispatchers should provide chest compression–only CPR instructions to callers for adults with suspected OHCA (Class I, LOE C-LD).It is reasonable for healthcare providers to provide chest compressions and ventilation for all adult patients in cardiac arrest, from either a cardiac or a noncardiac cause (Class IIb, LOE C-LD). When the victim has an advanced airway in place during CPR, rescuers no longer deliver cycles of 30 compressions and 2 breaths (ie, they no longer interrupt compressions to deliver 2 breaths). Instead, it may be reasonable for the provider to deliver 1 breath every 6 seconds (10 breaths per minute) while continuous chest compressions are being performed (Class IIb, LOE C-LD). When the victim has an advanced airway in place during CPR, it may be reasonable for the provider to deliver 1 breath every 6 seconds (10 breaths per minute) while continuous chest compressions are being performed (Class IIb, LOE C-LD). This simple rate, rather than a range of breaths per minute, should be easier to learn, remember, and perform.There is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of artifact-filtering algorithms for analysis of electrocardiographic (ECG) rhythm during CPR. Their use may be considered as part of a research program or if an EMS system has already incorporated ECG artifact-filtering algorithms in its resuscitation protocols (Class IIb, LOE C-EO).It may be reasonable to use audiovisual feedback devices during CPR for real-time optimization of CPR performance (Class IIb, LOE B-R).For victims with suspected spinal injury, rescuers should initially use manual spinal motion restriction (eg, placing 1 hand on either side of the patient’s head to hold it still) rather than immobilization devices, because use of immobilization devices by lay rescuers may be harmful (Class III: Harm, LOE C-LD).Knowledge GapsThe optimal method for ensuring adequate depth of chest compressions during manual CPRThe duration of chest compressions after which ventilation should be incorporated when using Hands-Only CPRThe optimal chest compression fractionOptimal use of CPR feedback devices to increase patient survivalPart 6: Alternative Techniques and Ancillary Devices for Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationHigh-quality conventional CPR (manual chest compressions with rescue breaths) generates about 25% to 33% of normal cardiac output and oxygen delivery. A variety of alternatives and adjuncts to conventional CPR have been developed with the aim of enhancing coronary and cerebral perfusion during resuscitation from cardiac arrest. Since the 2010 Guidelines were published, a number of clinical trials have provided new data regarding the effectiveness of these alternatives. Compared with conventional CPR, many of these techniques and devices require specialized equipment and training. Some have been tested in only highly selected subgroups of cardiac arrest patients; this selection must be noted when rescuers or healthcare systems consider implementation of the devices.Significant New and Updated RecommendationsThe Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) Prehospital Resuscitation Impedance Valve and Early Versus Delayed Analysis (PRIMED) study (n=8718)14 failed to demonstrate improved outcomes with the use of an impedance threshold device (ITD) as an adjunct to conventional CPR when compared with use of a sham device. This negative high-quality study prompted a Class III: No Benefit recommendation regarding routine use of the ITD.One large randomized controlled trial evaluated the use of active compression-decompression CPR plus an ITD.15 The writing group found interpretation of the true clinical effect of active compression-decompression CPR plus an ITD challenging because of wide confidence intervals around the effect estimate and also because of methodological concerns. The finding of improved neurologically intact survival in the study, however, supported a recommendation that this combination may be a reasonable alternative with available equipment and properly trained providers.Three randomized clinical trials comparing the use of mechanical chest compression devices with conventional CPR have been published since the 2010 Guidelines. None of these studies demonstrated superiority of mechanical chest compressions over conventional CPR. Manual chest compressions remain the standard of care for the treatment of cardiac arrest, but mechanical chest compression devices may be a reasonable alternative for use by properly trained personnel. The use of the mechanical chest compression devices may be considered in specific settings where the delivery of high-quality manual compressions may be challenging or dangerous for the provider (eg, prolonged CPR during hypothermic cardiac arrest, CPR in a moving ambulance, CPR in the angiography suite, CPR during preparation for ECPR), provided that rescuers strictly limit interruptions in CPR during deployment and removal of the device (Class IIb, LOE C-EO).Although several observational studies have been published documenting the use of ECPR, no randomized controlled trials have evaluated the effect of this therapy on survival.Knowledge GapsAre mechanical chest compression devices superior to manual chest compressions in special situations such as a moving ambulance, prolonged CPR, or procedures such as coronary angiography?What is the impact of implementing ECPR as part of the system of care for OHCA?Part 7: Adult Advanced Cardiovascular Life SupportThe major changes in the 2015 advanced cardiovascular life support (ACLS) guidelines include recommendations regarding prognostication during CPR based on end-tidal carbon dioxide measurements, use of vasopressin during resuscitation, timing of epinephrine administration stratified by shockable or nonshockable rhythms, and the possibility of bundling steroids, vasopressin, and epinephrine administration for treatment of IHCA. In addition, vasopressin has been removed from the pulseless arrest algorithm. Recommendations regarding physiologic monitoring of CPR were reviewed, although there is little new evidence.Significant New and Updated RecommendationsBased on new data, the recommendation for use of the maximal feasible inspired oxygen during CPR was strengthened. This recommendation applies only while CPR is ongoing and does not apply to care after ROSC.The new 2015 Guidelines Update continues to state that physiologic monitoring during CPR may be useful, but there has yet to be a clinical trial demonstrating that goal-directed CPR based on physiologic parameters improves outcomes.Recommendations for ultrasound use during cardiac arrest are largely unchanged, except for the explicit proviso that the use of ultrasound should not interfere with provision of high-quality CPR and conventional ACLS therapy.Continuous waveform capnography remained a Class I recommendation for confirming placement of an endotracheal tube. Ultrasound was added as an additional method for confirmation of endotracheal tube placement.The defibrillation strategies addressed by the 2015 ILCOR review resulted in