Skip to main content

Table 1 Baseline characteristics of the study population according to the cooling method

From: Impact of cooling method on the outcome of initial shockable or non-shockable out of hospital cardiac arrest patients receiving target temperature management: a nationwide multicentre cohort study

 

All patients

Missing

Overall

P values*

Shockable

P values*

Non-shockable

P values*

SC

EC

SC

EC

SC

EC

n = 1082

n = 931

n = 151

n = 441

n = 72

n = 490

n = 79

Basic information

 Men

801 (74.0)

0 (0.0)

692 (74.3)

109 (72.2)

0.617

356 (80.7)

56 (77.8)

0.527

336 (68.6)

53 (67.1)

1

 Age, y, median (IQR)

66 (53–75)

0 (0.0)

65 (53–94)

67 (55–89)

0.288

63 (51–72)

66 (53–73)

0.192

68 (56–78)

59 (56–77)

0.742

 Age category

0.158

  

0.312

  

0.319

  Aged 18–64 years

490 (45.3)

 

430 (46.2)

60 (39.7)

 

237 (53.7)

34 (47.2)

 

193 (39.4)

26 (32.9)

 

  Aged ≥ 65 years

592 (54.7)

 

501 (53.8)

91 (60.3)

 

204 (46.3)

38 (52.8)

 

297 (60.6)

53 (67.1)

 

 Cardiac cause of arrest

777 (71.8)

0 (0.0)

664 (71.3)

113 (74.8)

0.435

420 (95.2)

69 (95.8)

1

244 (49.8)

44 (55.7)

0.602

Prehospital information

 

0 (0.0)

         

 Bystander witness

800 (73.9)

0 (0.0)

698 (74.2)

109 (72.2)

0.618

351 (79.6)

52 (72.2)

0.165

340 (69.4)

57 (72.2)

0.335

 Bystander CPR

544 (50.3)

0 (0.0)

466 (50.1)

78 (51.7)

0.726

246 (55.8)

40 (55.6)

1

220 (44.9)

38 (48.1)

0.739

 Use of public-access AEDs

82 (7.6)

0 (0.0)

70 (7.5)

12 (7.9)

0.868

41 (9.3)

6 (8.3)

1

29 (5.9)

6 (7.6)

0.532

 Initially documented rhythm at the scene

 

0 (0.0)

  

1

      

  Shockable rhythm

513 (47.5)

 

441 (47.4)

72 (47.7)

       

  Ventricular fibrillation

505 (46.8)

 

433 (46.5)

72 (47.7)

 

433 (98.2)

72 (100)

 

N/A

N/A

 

  Pulseless ventricular tachycardia

8 (0.7)

 

8 (0.9)

0 (0.0)

 

8 (1.5)

0 (0.0)

 

N/A

N/A

 

 Non-shockable rhythm

569 (52.5)

 

490 (52.6)

79 (52.3)

       

  Pulseless electric activity

324 (29.9)

 

281 (30.2)

43 (28.5)

 

N/A

N/A

 

281 (57.3)

43 (54.4)

 

  Asystole

245 (22.6)

 

209 (22.4)

36 (23.8)

 

N/A

N/A

 

209 (42.7)

36 (45.6)

 

 Epinephrine

339 (31.3)

0 (0.0)

275 (29.5)

64 (42.4)

0.002

97 (22.0)

30 (41.7)

< 0.001

178 (36.3)

34 (43.0)

0.261

 Advanced airway management

950 (87.8)

0 (0.0)

822 (88.3)

128 (84.8)

0.228

387 (87.8)

64 (88.9)

1

435 (88.8)

64 (81.0)

0.064

 Call to EMS contact with a patient, min, median (IQR)

8 (6–9)

0 (0.0)

8 (6–10)

8 (7–9)

0.887

7 (6–9)

7 (6–8)

0.695

8 (7–10)

8 (7–10)

0.832

In-hospital information

 Use of ancillary cooling methods

417 (38.5)

0 (0.0)

349 (37.5)

68 (45.0)

0.087

189 (42.9)

38 (52.8)

0.126

160 (32.7)

30 (38.0)

0.369

  Cold intravenous fluid

369 (34.1)

 

306 (32.9)

63 (41.7)

0.04

164 (37.2)

36 (50.0)

0.05

142 (29.0)

27 (34.2)

0.355

  Stomach cooling with nasogastric tube

125 (11.6)

 

111 (11.9)

14 (9.3)

0.411

73 (16.6)

8 (11.1)

0.297

38 (7.8)

6 (7.6)

1

 Percutaneous coronary intervention

254 (23.5)

0 (0.0)

207 (22.2)

47 (31.1)

0.022

144 (32.7)

33 (45.8)

0.033

63 (12.9)

14 (17.7)

0.286

  Success of percutaneous coronary interventiona,b

231 (90.9)

9 (3.5)

189 (95.5)

42 (89.4)

0.153

134 (96.4)

29 (87.9)

0.07

55 (93.2)

13 (92.9)

1

 Targeted at H-TTM

726 (67.1)

0 (0.0)

611 (65.6)

115 (76.2)

0.012

324 (73.5)

56 (77.8)

0.472

287 (58.6)

59 (74.7)

0.006

 TTM induction time, min, median (IQR)a

150 (63–300)

42 (3.9)

150 (70–300)

120 (60–243)

0.03

180 (90–355)

150 (64–297)

0.05

129 (60–246)

99 (60–188)

0.295

  1. Values are expressed numbers (percentages) unless indicated otherwise
  2. IQR interquartile range, CPR cardiopulmonary resuscitation, AED automated external defibrillator, EMS emergency medical service, TTM target temperature management, H-TTM target temperature of 32, 33, 34 °C, SC surface cooling, EC endovascular cooling. “EC: n = 151/72/79” includes patients receiving both EC and SC methods
  3. *Comparisons between the 2 groups were evaluated with Mann–Whitney U test for numeric variables and Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables
  4. aCalculated for patients for whom data was available
  5. bCalculated for patients who were performed PCI