(1) Background: Telemetry units allow the continuous monitoring of vital signs and ECG of patients. Such physiological indicators work as the digital signatures and biomarkers of disease that can aid in detecting abnormalities that appear before cardiac arrests (CAs). This review aims to identify the vital sign abnormalities measured by telemetry systems that most accurately predict CAs. (2) Methods: We conducted a systematic review using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and MEDLINE to search studies evaluating telemetry-detected vital signs that preceded in-hospital CAs (IHCAs). (3) Results and Discussion: Out of 45 studies, 9 met the eligibility criteria. Seven studies were case series, and 2 were case controls. Four studies evaluated ECG parameters, and 5 evaluated other physiological indicators such as blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, and temperature. Vital sign changes were highly frequent among participants and reached statistical significance compared to control subjects. There was no single vital sign change pattern found in all patients. ECG alarm thresholds may be adjustable to reduce alarm fatigue. Our review was limited by the significant dissimilarities of the studies on methodology and objectives. (4) Conclusions: Evidence confirms that changes in vital signs have the potential for predicting IHCAs. There is no consensus on how to best analyze these digital biomarkers. More rigorous and larger-scale prospective studies are needed to determine the predictive value of telemetry-detected vital signs for IHCAs.

OBJECTIVE: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused a global pandemic and had a negative impact on the entire health care system. To understand the effect of COVID-19 on outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA), a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies was designed to compare the pre- and intra-pandemic periods of adult patients who suffered cardiac arrest, and additionally by performing a sub-analysis related to COVID-19 positive vs. negative patients in the same group of patients.
METHODS: To evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on IHCA outcomes a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Pubmed (MEDLINE), Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane database were searched for articles published from 1 January 2020 - 8 April 2023.
RESULTS: Return of spontaneous circulation events among IHCA patients in pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 pandemic periods varied and amounted to 64.0% vs. 60.0%, respectively (OR=1.23; 95%CI: 1.19 to 1.26; p<0.001). Re-arrest occurrence was 4.5% vs. 4.9%, respectively (OR=1.24; 95%CI: 1.00 to 1.53; p=0.05). Survival to hospital discharge (SHD) was 25.1% compared to 20.9% for COVID-19 period (OR = 1.17; 95%CI: 0.96 to 1.41; p=0.12). During the COVID-19 period, SHD in COVID-19 positive patients was 14.0% compared to 25.9% for patients without COVID-19 (OR=0.72; 95%CI: 0.28 to 1.86; p=0.50). 30-day survival rate among COVID-19 positive vs. negative patients was 62.6% vs. 58.3%, respectively (OR =0.99; 95%CI: 0.23 to 4.24; p=0.99).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection had reduced rates of ROSC and SDH, as well as poorer neurologic outcomes and increased in hospital re-arrests during the COVID-19 period. However, the 30-day survival rate was similar in SARS-CoV-2 positive and negative patients.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes following in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) in patients with COVID-19 have been reported by several small single-institutional studies; however, there are no large studies contrasting COVID-19 IHCA with non-COVID-19 IHCA. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes following IHCA between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients.
METHODS: We searched databases using predefined search terms and appropriate Boolean operators. All the relevant articles published till August 2022 were included in the analyses. The systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. An odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to measure effects.
RESULTS: Among 855 studies screened, 6 studies with 27,453 IHCA patients (63.84% male) with COVID-19 and 20,766 (59.7% male) without COVID-19 were included in the analysis. IHCA among patients with COVID-19 has lower odds of achieving return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) (OR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.62-0.70). Similarly, patients with COVID-19 have higher odds of 30-day mortality following IHCA (OR: 2.26, 95% CI: 2.08-2.45) and have 45% lower odds of cardiac arrest because of a shockable rhythm (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.50-0.60) (9.59% vs. 16.39%). COVID-19 patients less commonly underwent targeted temperature management (TTM) or coronary angiography; however, they were more commonly intubated and on vasopressor therapy as compared to patients who did not have a COVID-19 infection.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis showed that IHCA with COVID-19 has a higher mortality and lower rates of ROSC compared with non-COVID-19 IHCA. COVID-19 is an independent risk factor for poor outcomes in IHCA patients.

Several prediction models of survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) have been published, but no overview of model performance and external validation exists. We performed a systematic review of the available prognostic models for outcome prediction of attempted resuscitation for IHCA using pre-arrest factors to enhance clinical decision-making through improved outcome prediction.
This systematic review followed the CHARMS and PRISMA guidelines. Medline, Embase, Web of Science were searched up to October 2021. Studies developing, updating or validating a prediction model with pre-arrest factors for any potential clinical outcome of attempted resuscitation for IHCA were included. Studies were appraised critically according to the PROBAST checklist. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to pool AUROC values of externally validated models.
Out of 2678 initial articles screened, 33 studies were included in this systematic review: 16 model development studies, 5 model updating studies and 12 model validation studies. The most frequently included pre-arrest factors included age, functional status, (metastatic) malignancy, heart disease, cerebrovascular events, respiratory, renal or hepatic insufficiency, hypotension and sepsis. Only six of the developed models have been independently validated in external populations. The GO-FAR score showed the best performance with a pooled AUROC of 0.78 (95% CI 0.69-0.85), versus 0.59 (95%CI 0.50-0.68) for the PAM and 0.62 (95% CI 0.49-0.74) for the PAR.
Several prognostic models for clinical outcome after attempted resuscitation for IHCA have been published. Most have a moderate risk of bias and have not been validated externally. The GO-FAR score showed the most acceptable performance. Future research should focus on updating existing models for use in clinical settings, specifically pre-arrest counselling. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42021269235. Registered 21 July 2021.

The established benefits of cooling along with development of sophisticated methods to safely and precisely induce, maintain, monitor, and reverse hypothermia have led to the development of targeted temperature management (TTM). Early trials in human subjects showed that hypothermia conferred better neurological outcomes when compared to normothermia among survivors of cardiac arrest, leading to guidelines recommending targeted hypothermia in this patient population. Multiple studies have sought to explore and compare the benefit of hypothermia in various subgroups of patients, such as survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest versus in-hospital cardiac arrest, and survivors of an initial shockable versus non-shockable rhythm. Larger and more recent trials have shown no statistically significant difference in neurological outcomes between patients with targeted hypothermia and targeted normothermia; further, aggressive cooling is associated with a higher incidence of multiple systemic complications. Based on this data, temporal trends have leaned towards using a lenient temperature target in more recent times. Current guidelines recommend selecting and maintaining a constant target temperature between 32 and 36 °C for those patients in whom TTM is used (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence), as soon as possible after return of spontaneous circulation is achieved and airway, breathing (including mechanical ventilation), and circulation are stabilized. The comparative benefit of lower (32-34 °C) versus higher (36 °C) temperatures remains unknown, and further research may help elucidate this. Any survivor of cardiac arrest who is comatose (defined as unarousable unresponsiveness to external stimuli) should be considered as a candidate for TTM regardless of the initial presenting rhythm, and the decision to opt for targeted hypothermia versus targeted normothermia should be made on a case-by-case basis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the test accuracy of pre-arrest clinical decision tools for in-hospital cardiac arrest survival outcomes.
METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception through January 2022 for randomized and non-randomized studies. We used the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies framework to evaluate risk of bias, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to evaluate certainty of evidence. We report sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive outcome, and negative predictive outcome for prediction of survival outcomes. PROSPERO CRD42021268005.
RESULTS: We searched 2517 studies and included 23 studies using 13 different scores: 12 studies investigating 8 different scores assessing survival outcomes and 11 studies using 5 different scores to predict neurological outcomes. All were historical cohorts/ case control designs including adults only. Test accuracy for each score varied greatly. Across the 12 studies investigating 8 different scores assessing survival to hospital discharge/ 30-day survival, the negative predictive values (NPVs) for the prediction of survival varied from 55.6% to 100%. The GO-FAR score was evaluated in 7 studies with NPVs for survival with cerebral performance category (CPC) 1 ranging from 95.0% to 99.2%. Two scores assessed survival with CPC ≤ 2 and these were not externally validated. Across all prediction scores, certainty of evidence was rated as very low.
CONCLUSIONS: We identified very low certainty evidence across 23 studies for 13 different pre-arrest prediction scores to outcome following IHCA. No score was sufficiently reliable to support its use in clinical practice. We identified no evidence for children.

Our aim was to determine the association of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for in hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) with quality of life after discharge.
We performed a systematic review using available databases for studies that measured any quality-of-life or functional outcome both before and after CPR for IHCA. All screening and data abstraction was performed in duplicate.
We screened 10,927 records and included 24 papers representing 20 unique studies. Fifteen studies measured Cerebral Performance Category. Survival ranged from 11.8% to 39.5%. The risk of impaired cerebral function after discharged ranged from -16.1% (lower risk) to 44.7% increased risk of poor cerebral function after surviving to discharge. Four studies measured discharge to an institutional environment finding that the risk was increased by 18.2-72.2% among survivors. One study measured EQ-5D and found no difference pre and post CPR. One study measured performance of activities of daily living finding that survivors needed assistance with more activities after discharge.
Our review is limited by the lack of adjustment for confounders, including the baseline level of each outcome, in all included studies. Therefore, although risk for most outcomes was increased after discharge vs pre-admission we cannot be certain if this is a causal relationship.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated whether combination therapy with vasopressin, steroid, and epinephrine (VSE) improves in-hospital survival and return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) during and after resuscitation in-hospital cardiac arrest (CA).
METHODS: Various databases were explored from inception until October 2021 for relevant published clinical trials and cohort studies.
RESULTS: Three clinical trials were included. Pooled analysis suggested that VSE was significantly associated with increased ROSC in patients with in-hospital CA (IHCA) (odds ratio (OR): 2.281, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.304-3.989, P value = 0.004). Meta-analysis of two studies (368 patients) demonstrated a significant difference in the reduction of mean arterial pressure (MAP) during and 15-20 min after cardiopulmonary resuscitation (standardized mean difference (SMD): 1.069, 95% CI: 0.851-1.288, P value < 0.001), renal failure free days (SMD = 0.590; 95% CI: 0.312-0.869 days; P value < 0.001), and coagulation failure free days (SMD = 0.403; 95% CI: 0.128-0.679, P value = 0.004). However, no significant difference was observed for survival-to-discharge ratio (OR: 2.082, 95% CI: 0.638-6.796, P value = 0.225) and ventilator free days (SMD = 0.201, 95% CI: - 0.677, 1.079 days; P value = 0.838).
CONCLUSIONS: VSE combination therapy during and after IHCA may have beneficial effects in terms of the ROSC, renal and circulatory failure free days, and MAP. Prospero registration: CRD42020178297 (05/07/2020).

Cardiac arrest is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Cardiac arrest can occur in the community or among hospitalized patients. There are many commonalities between in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest; however, significant differences exist. Optimizing outcomes for patients with IHCA depends on high-quality care supported by the best available evidence. It is essential that critical care nurses are familiar with the evidence related to IHCA. This article focuses on a review of the evidence on IHCA, focusing on practical implications for critical care nursing practice.

UNASSIGNED: To perform a review of the literature on the association between socioeconomic status and risk of and outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest.
UNASSIGNED: PubMed and Embase were searched on January 24, 2020 for studies evaluating the association between socioeconomic status and risk of and/or outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Two reviewers independently screened the titles/abstracts and selected full texts for relevance. Data were extracted from included studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool.
UNASSIGNED: The literature search yielded 4960 unique records. We included nine studies evaluating the association between socioeconomic status and risk of and/or outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest. All studies were observational cohort studies, of which seven were from the USA. Seven studies were in an adult population, while two studies were in a pediatric population. Results were overall inconsistent although some studies found a higher in-hospital cardiac arrest incidence in patients from low-income communities. There was no clear association between other socioeconomic factors (i.e. education, occupation, marital status, and insurance) and risk of or outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Due to the scarcity and heterogeneity of available studies, meta-analyses were not performed.
UNASSIGNED: There are limited data regarding the association between socioeconomic status and risk of and outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest and further research is warranted. Understanding the association between socioeconomic status and in-hospital cardiac arrest may reveal strategies to mitigate potential inequalities.