Comparison of team-focused CPR vs standard CPR in resuscitation from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: Results from a statewide quality improvement initiative

Abstract Background Team-focused CPR (TFCPR) is a choreographed approach to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with emphasis on minimally interrupted high-quality chest compressions, early defibrillation, and discourages endotracheal intubation and encourages use of the bag-valve-mask (BVM) and/or...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Resuscitation 2016-08, Vol.105, p.165-172
Hauptverfasser: Pearson, David A, Darrell Nelson, R, Monk, Lisa, Tyson, Clark, Jollis, James G, Granger, Christopher B, Corbett, Claire, Garvey, Lee, Runyon, Michael S
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 172
container_issue
container_start_page 165
container_title Resuscitation
container_volume 105
creator Pearson, David A
Darrell Nelson, R
Monk, Lisa
Tyson, Clark
Jollis, James G
Granger, Christopher B
Corbett, Claire
Garvey, Lee
Runyon, Michael S
description Abstract Background Team-focused CPR (TFCPR) is a choreographed approach to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with emphasis on minimally interrupted high-quality chest compressions, early defibrillation, and discourages endotracheal intubation and encourages use of the bag-valve-mask (BVM) and/or blind-insertion airway device (BIAD) with a ventilation rate of 8–10 breaths/min to minimize hyperventilation. Widespread incorporation of TFCPR in North Carolina (NC) EMS agencies began in 2011, yet its impact on outcomes is unknown. Objectives To determine whether TFCPR improves survival with good neurological outcome in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients compared to standard CPR. Methods This retrospective cohort analysis of NC EMS agencies reporting data to the Cardiac Arrest Registry for Enhanced Survival (CARES) database from January 2010 to June 2014 included adult, non-traumatic OHCA with presumed cardiac etiology where EMS performed CPR or patient received defibrillation. Exclusions were arrest terminated per EMS policy or DNR. EMS agencies self-reported the TFCPR implementation dates. Patients were categorized as receiving either TFCPR or standard CPR. The primary outcome was good neurologic outcome at time of hospital discharge defined as Pittsburgh Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) 1–2. Results Of 14,994 OHCAs, 14,129 patients were included for analysis with a mean age 65 (IQR 50–81) years, 61% male, 7.3% with good neurologic outcome, 24.3% with shockable initial rhythm, and 71.5% receiving TFCPR. Of the 3427 (24.3%) with an initial shockable rhythm, 739 (71.9%) had a good neurological outcome. Good neurologic outcome was higher with TFCPR [836 (8.3%, 95%CI 7.7–8.8%)] vs. standard CPR [193 (4.8%, 95%CI 4.2–5.5%)]. Logistic regression controlling for demographic and arrest characteristics revealed TFCPR (OR 1.5), witnessed arrest (OR 4.3), initial shockable rhythm (OR 7.1), and in-hospital hypothermia were associated with good neurologic outcome. Mechanical CPR device (OR 0.68), CPR feedback device (OR 0.47), and endotracheal intubation (OR 0.44) were associated with less likelihood for a good neurologic outcome. Conclusion In our statewide OHCA cohort, TFCPR was associated with improved survival with good neurological outcome.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.04.008
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1807085167</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0300957216300211</els_id><sourcerecordid>1807085167</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c504t-f410b70e33a75a451edf9cf90d4ac9c186da2fc862522772b7f816ed58cc559d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNUl2L1DAUDaK44-pfkIAvvrR70zZNqyAsw_oBC8qqzyGT3GDGtplN0pH5L_5YU7ourE8-Jbmce87NOZeQVwxKBqy92JcB4xy1Syo5P5VVLpbQlADdI7JhnagLxgU8JhuoAYqei-qMPItxDwA178VTclYJVrOuaTbk99aPBxVc9BP1liZUY2G9niMauv1yQ4-RxqQmo8L6dhN9oE5t8CP1cyq8LX74eMj1geoMd0pTFTI4vaE3uWVIcQWrhTHhL2eQ3s5qcOlE3XgI_ogjTilLuOQy-RGfkydWDRFf3J3n5Pv7q2_bj8X15w-ftpfXhebQpMI2DHYCsK6V4KrhDI3tte3BNEr3mnWtUZXVXVvxqhKi2gnbsRYN77TmvDf1OXm98uYhbuc8sRxd1DgMakI_R8k6ENBx1ooMfbtCdfAxBrTyENyowkkykEs8ci8fGCSXeCQ0MseTu1_eCc27Ec197988MuBqBWD-7tFhkJkIJ43GBdRJGu_-U-jdPzx6yL5qNfzEE8a9n8OUHZVMxkqC_LpsyrIorM2XirH6D98fwgM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1807085167</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of team-focused CPR vs standard CPR in resuscitation from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: Results from a statewide quality improvement initiative</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Pearson, David A ; Darrell Nelson, R ; Monk, Lisa ; Tyson, Clark ; Jollis, James G ; Granger, Christopher B ; Corbett, Claire ; Garvey, Lee ; Runyon, Michael S</creator><creatorcontrib>Pearson, David A ; Darrell Nelson, R ; Monk, Lisa ; Tyson, Clark ; Jollis, James G ; Granger, Christopher B ; Corbett, Claire ; Garvey, Lee ; Runyon, Michael S</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Background Team-focused CPR (TFCPR) is a choreographed approach to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with emphasis on minimally interrupted high-quality chest compressions, early defibrillation, and discourages endotracheal intubation and encourages use of the bag-valve-mask (BVM) and/or blind-insertion airway device (BIAD) with a ventilation rate of 8–10 breaths/min to minimize hyperventilation. Widespread incorporation of TFCPR in North Carolina (NC) EMS agencies began in 2011, yet its impact on outcomes is unknown. Objectives To determine whether TFCPR improves survival with good neurological outcome in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients compared to standard CPR. Methods This retrospective cohort analysis of NC EMS agencies reporting data to the Cardiac Arrest Registry for Enhanced Survival (CARES) database from January 2010 to June 2014 included adult, non-traumatic OHCA with presumed cardiac etiology where EMS performed CPR or patient received defibrillation. Exclusions were arrest terminated per EMS policy or DNR. EMS agencies self-reported the TFCPR implementation dates. Patients were categorized as receiving either TFCPR or standard CPR. The primary outcome was good neurologic outcome at time of hospital discharge defined as Pittsburgh Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) 1–2. Results Of 14,994 OHCAs, 14,129 patients were included for analysis with a mean age 65 (IQR 50–81) years, 61% male, 7.3% with good neurologic outcome, 24.3% with shockable initial rhythm, and 71.5% receiving TFCPR. Of the 3427 (24.3%) with an initial shockable rhythm, 739 (71.9%) had a good neurological outcome. Good neurologic outcome was higher with TFCPR [836 (8.3%, 95%CI 7.7–8.8%)] vs. standard CPR [193 (4.8%, 95%CI 4.2–5.5%)]. Logistic regression controlling for demographic and arrest characteristics revealed TFCPR (OR 1.5), witnessed arrest (OR 4.3), initial shockable rhythm (OR 7.1), and in-hospital hypothermia were associated with good neurologic outcome. Mechanical CPR device (OR 0.68), CPR feedback device (OR 0.47), and endotracheal intubation (OR 0.44) were associated with less likelihood for a good neurologic outcome. Conclusion In our statewide OHCA cohort, TFCPR was associated with improved survival with good neurological outcome.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0300-9572</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-1570</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.04.008</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27131844</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ireland: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Cardiac arrest ; Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation - methods ; Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation - mortality ; CPR ; Databases, Factual ; Electric Countershock ; Emergency ; Emergency Medical Services - methods ; Emergency Medical Services - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Humans ; Middle Aged ; North Carolina ; Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest - mortality ; Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest - therapy ; Patient Care Team - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Program Evaluation ; Quality Improvement ; Regression Analysis ; Retrospective Studies ; Targeted temperature management</subject><ispartof>Resuscitation, 2016-08, Vol.105, p.165-172</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</rights><rights>2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c504t-f410b70e33a75a451edf9cf90d4ac9c186da2fc862522772b7f816ed58cc559d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c504t-f410b70e33a75a451edf9cf90d4ac9c186da2fc862522772b7f816ed58cc559d3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4840-9393</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300957216300211$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27131844$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pearson, David A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Darrell Nelson, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monk, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tyson, Clark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jollis, James G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Granger, Christopher B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corbett, Claire</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garvey, Lee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Runyon, Michael S</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of team-focused CPR vs standard CPR in resuscitation from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: Results from a statewide quality improvement initiative</title><title>Resuscitation</title><addtitle>Resuscitation</addtitle><description>Abstract Background Team-focused CPR (TFCPR) is a choreographed approach to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with emphasis on minimally interrupted high-quality chest compressions, early defibrillation, and discourages endotracheal intubation and encourages use of the bag-valve-mask (BVM) and/or blind-insertion airway device (BIAD) with a ventilation rate of 8–10 breaths/min to minimize hyperventilation. Widespread incorporation of TFCPR in North Carolina (NC) EMS agencies began in 2011, yet its impact on outcomes is unknown. Objectives To determine whether TFCPR improves survival with good neurological outcome in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients compared to standard CPR. Methods This retrospective cohort analysis of NC EMS agencies reporting data to the Cardiac Arrest Registry for Enhanced Survival (CARES) database from January 2010 to June 2014 included adult, non-traumatic OHCA with presumed cardiac etiology where EMS performed CPR or patient received defibrillation. Exclusions were arrest terminated per EMS policy or DNR. EMS agencies self-reported the TFCPR implementation dates. Patients were categorized as receiving either TFCPR or standard CPR. The primary outcome was good neurologic outcome at time of hospital discharge defined as Pittsburgh Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) 1–2. Results Of 14,994 OHCAs, 14,129 patients were included for analysis with a mean age 65 (IQR 50–81) years, 61% male, 7.3% with good neurologic outcome, 24.3% with shockable initial rhythm, and 71.5% receiving TFCPR. Of the 3427 (24.3%) with an initial shockable rhythm, 739 (71.9%) had a good neurological outcome. Good neurologic outcome was higher with TFCPR [836 (8.3%, 95%CI 7.7–8.8%)] vs. standard CPR [193 (4.8%, 95%CI 4.2–5.5%)]. Logistic regression controlling for demographic and arrest characteristics revealed TFCPR (OR 1.5), witnessed arrest (OR 4.3), initial shockable rhythm (OR 7.1), and in-hospital hypothermia were associated with good neurologic outcome. Mechanical CPR device (OR 0.68), CPR feedback device (OR 0.47), and endotracheal intubation (OR 0.44) were associated with less likelihood for a good neurologic outcome. Conclusion In our statewide OHCA cohort, TFCPR was associated with improved survival with good neurological outcome.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Cardiac arrest</subject><subject>Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation - methods</subject><subject>Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation - mortality</subject><subject>CPR</subject><subject>Databases, Factual</subject><subject>Electric Countershock</subject><subject>Emergency</subject><subject>Emergency Medical Services - methods</subject><subject>Emergency Medical Services - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>North Carolina</subject><subject>Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest - mortality</subject><subject>Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest - therapy</subject><subject>Patient Care Team - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Program Evaluation</subject><subject>Quality Improvement</subject><subject>Regression Analysis</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Targeted temperature management</subject><issn>0300-9572</issn><issn>1873-1570</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNUl2L1DAUDaK44-pfkIAvvrR70zZNqyAsw_oBC8qqzyGT3GDGtplN0pH5L_5YU7ourE8-Jbmce87NOZeQVwxKBqy92JcB4xy1Syo5P5VVLpbQlADdI7JhnagLxgU8JhuoAYqei-qMPItxDwA178VTclYJVrOuaTbk99aPBxVc9BP1liZUY2G9niMauv1yQ4-RxqQmo8L6dhN9oE5t8CP1cyq8LX74eMj1geoMd0pTFTI4vaE3uWVIcQWrhTHhL2eQ3s5qcOlE3XgI_ogjTilLuOQy-RGfkydWDRFf3J3n5Pv7q2_bj8X15w-ftpfXhebQpMI2DHYCsK6V4KrhDI3tte3BNEr3mnWtUZXVXVvxqhKi2gnbsRYN77TmvDf1OXm98uYhbuc8sRxd1DgMakI_R8k6ENBx1ooMfbtCdfAxBrTyENyowkkykEs8ci8fGCSXeCQ0MseTu1_eCc27Ec197988MuBqBWD-7tFhkJkIJ43GBdRJGu_-U-jdPzx6yL5qNfzEE8a9n8OUHZVMxkqC_LpsyrIorM2XirH6D98fwgM</recordid><startdate>20160801</startdate><enddate>20160801</enddate><creator>Pearson, David A</creator><creator>Darrell Nelson, R</creator><creator>Monk, Lisa</creator><creator>Tyson, Clark</creator><creator>Jollis, James G</creator><creator>Granger, Christopher B</creator><creator>Corbett, Claire</creator><creator>Garvey, Lee</creator><creator>Runyon, Michael S</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4840-9393</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20160801</creationdate><title>Comparison of team-focused CPR vs standard CPR in resuscitation from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: Results from a statewide quality improvement initiative</title><author>Pearson, David A ; Darrell Nelson, R ; Monk, Lisa ; Tyson, Clark ; Jollis, James G ; Granger, Christopher B ; Corbett, Claire ; Garvey, Lee ; Runyon, Michael S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c504t-f410b70e33a75a451edf9cf90d4ac9c186da2fc862522772b7f816ed58cc559d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Cardiac arrest</topic><topic>Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation - methods</topic><topic>Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation - mortality</topic><topic>CPR</topic><topic>Databases, Factual</topic><topic>Electric Countershock</topic><topic>Emergency</topic><topic>Emergency Medical Services - methods</topic><topic>Emergency Medical Services - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>North Carolina</topic><topic>Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest - mortality</topic><topic>Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest - therapy</topic><topic>Patient Care Team - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Program Evaluation</topic><topic>Quality Improvement</topic><topic>Regression Analysis</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Targeted temperature management</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pearson, David A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Darrell Nelson, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monk, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tyson, Clark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jollis, James G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Granger, Christopher B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corbett, Claire</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garvey, Lee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Runyon, Michael S</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Resuscitation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pearson, David A</au><au>Darrell Nelson, R</au><au>Monk, Lisa</au><au>Tyson, Clark</au><au>Jollis, James G</au><au>Granger, Christopher B</au><au>Corbett, Claire</au><au>Garvey, Lee</au><au>Runyon, Michael S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of team-focused CPR vs standard CPR in resuscitation from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: Results from a statewide quality improvement initiative</atitle><jtitle>Resuscitation</jtitle><addtitle>Resuscitation</addtitle><date>2016-08-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>105</volume><spage>165</spage><epage>172</epage><pages>165-172</pages><issn>0300-9572</issn><eissn>1873-1570</eissn><abstract>Abstract Background Team-focused CPR (TFCPR) is a choreographed approach to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with emphasis on minimally interrupted high-quality chest compressions, early defibrillation, and discourages endotracheal intubation and encourages use of the bag-valve-mask (BVM) and/or blind-insertion airway device (BIAD) with a ventilation rate of 8–10 breaths/min to minimize hyperventilation. Widespread incorporation of TFCPR in North Carolina (NC) EMS agencies began in 2011, yet its impact on outcomes is unknown. Objectives To determine whether TFCPR improves survival with good neurological outcome in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients compared to standard CPR. Methods This retrospective cohort analysis of NC EMS agencies reporting data to the Cardiac Arrest Registry for Enhanced Survival (CARES) database from January 2010 to June 2014 included adult, non-traumatic OHCA with presumed cardiac etiology where EMS performed CPR or patient received defibrillation. Exclusions were arrest terminated per EMS policy or DNR. EMS agencies self-reported the TFCPR implementation dates. Patients were categorized as receiving either TFCPR or standard CPR. The primary outcome was good neurologic outcome at time of hospital discharge defined as Pittsburgh Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) 1–2. Results Of 14,994 OHCAs, 14,129 patients were included for analysis with a mean age 65 (IQR 50–81) years, 61% male, 7.3% with good neurologic outcome, 24.3% with shockable initial rhythm, and 71.5% receiving TFCPR. Of the 3427 (24.3%) with an initial shockable rhythm, 739 (71.9%) had a good neurological outcome. Good neurologic outcome was higher with TFCPR [836 (8.3%, 95%CI 7.7–8.8%)] vs. standard CPR [193 (4.8%, 95%CI 4.2–5.5%)]. Logistic regression controlling for demographic and arrest characteristics revealed TFCPR (OR 1.5), witnessed arrest (OR 4.3), initial shockable rhythm (OR 7.1), and in-hospital hypothermia were associated with good neurologic outcome. Mechanical CPR device (OR 0.68), CPR feedback device (OR 0.47), and endotracheal intubation (OR 0.44) were associated with less likelihood for a good neurologic outcome. Conclusion In our statewide OHCA cohort, TFCPR was associated with improved survival with good neurological outcome.</abstract><cop>Ireland</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>27131844</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.04.008</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4840-9393</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0300-9572
ispartof Resuscitation, 2016-08, Vol.105, p.165-172
issn 0300-9572
1873-1570
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1807085167
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Cardiac arrest
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation - methods
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation - mortality
CPR
Databases, Factual
Electric Countershock
Emergency
Emergency Medical Services - methods
Emergency Medical Services - statistics & numerical data
Humans
Middle Aged
North Carolina
Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest - mortality
Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest - therapy
Patient Care Team - statistics & numerical data
Program Evaluation
Quality Improvement
Regression Analysis
Retrospective Studies
Targeted temperature management
title Comparison of team-focused CPR vs standard CPR in resuscitation from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: Results from a statewide quality improvement initiative
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T06%3A55%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20team-focused%20CPR%20vs%20standard%20CPR%20in%20resuscitation%20from%20out-of-hospital%20cardiac%20arrest:%20Results%20from%20a%20statewide%20quality%20improvement%20initiative&rft.jtitle=Resuscitation&rft.au=Pearson,%20David%20A&rft.date=2016-08-01&rft.volume=105&rft.spage=165&rft.epage=172&rft.pages=165-172&rft.issn=0300-9572&rft.eissn=1873-1570&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.04.008&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1807085167%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1807085167&rft_id=info:pmid/27131844&rft_els_id=S0300957216300211&rfr_iscdi=true