Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) research traditionally focuses on survival. In 2018, the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) proposed more patient-centered outcomes. Our narrative review assessed clinical trials after 2018 to identify the trends of outcome metrics in the field OHCA research. We performed a search of the PubMed database from 1 January 2019 to 22 September 2023. Prospective clinical trials involving adult humans were eligible. Studies that did not report any patient-related outcomes or were not available in full-text or English language were excluded. The articles were assessed for demographic information and primary and secondary outcomes. We included 89 studies for analysis. For the primary outcome, 31 (35%) studies assessed neurocognitive functions, and 27 (30%) used survival. For secondary outcomes, neurocognitive function was present in 20 (22%) studies, and survival was present in 10 (11%) studies. Twenty-six (29%) studies used both survival and neurocognitive function. Since the publication of the COSCA guidelines in 2018, there has been an increased focus on neurologic outcomes. Although survival outcomes are used frequently, we observed a trend toward fewer studies with ROSC as a primary outcome. There were no quality-of-life assessments, suggesting a need for more studies with patient-centered outcomes that can inform the guidelines for cardiac-arrest management.

BACKGROUND: Pressure injuries (PIs) are generally regarded as predictable and preventable. Therefore, providing appropriate care for PI prevention and its management is vital. Patient education is a significant component of the PI international guideline-recommended strategy in preventing PIs. Despite the availability of evidence supporting patient education, consensus regarding the effect of patient education on knowledge, patient participation, wound healing progress, and quality of life is still lacking.
OBJECTIVE: The main aim was to systematically evaluate the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of structured patient education on their knowledge, participation, wound healing, and quality of life.
METHODS: The search strategy retrieved studies published between 2009 and 2021 in English across PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, ProQuest, and Cochrane Library. Adult participants aged 18 years and above were included. Randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental, and interventional studies were all included in this review. Three independent reviewers assessed the methodological quality of the studies, prior to critical appraisal, using standardized tools, that is, the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for randomized and non-randomized studies. A narrative synthesis was conducted.
RESULTS: A total of eight studies (466 participants) were included in this review. Available evidence indicated improved patient knowledge, participation, and quality of life with structured patient education. However, there was insufficient high-quality evidence to conclude the effect on wound healing.
CONCLUSIONS: Structured patient education for PI was deemed to help improve patients\' knowledge, participation, and quality of life. More rigorous trials are needed for the effect on wound healing progress. Thus, future educational interventions should include wound care components that describe the patient\'s role in promoting wound healing. A well-structured patient education program protocol is crucial to ensure the educational intervention was measurable in its effectiveness and reproducibility.