The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Adrenaline to improve survival in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: the PARAMEDIC2 RCT

Adrenaline to improve survival in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: the PARAMEDIC2 RCT
Adrenaline to improve survival in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: the PARAMEDIC2 RCT

BACKGROUND: Adrenaline has been used as a treatment for cardiac arrest for many years, despite uncertainty about its effects on long-term outcomes and concerns that it may cause worse neurological outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to evaluate the effects of adrenaline on survival and neurological outcomes, and to assess the cost-effectiveness of adrenaline use.

DESIGN: This was a pragmatic, randomised, allocation-concealed, placebo-controlled, parallel-group superiority trial and economic evaluation. Costs are expressed in Great British pounds and reported in 2016/17 prices.

SETTING: This trial was set in five NHS ambulance services in England and Wales.

PARTICIPANTS: Adults treated for an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were included. Patients were ineligible if they were pregnant, if they were aged < 16 years, if the cardiac arrest had been caused by anaphylaxis or life-threatening asthma, or if adrenaline had already been given.

INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to either adrenaline (1 mg) or placebo in a 1 : 1 allocation ratio by the opening of allocation-concealed treatment packs.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was survival to 30 days. The secondary outcomes were survival to hospital admission, survival to hospital discharge, survival at 3, 6 and 12 months, neurological outcomes and health-related quality of life through to 6 months. The economic evaluation assessed the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained from the perspective of the NHS and Personal Social Services. Participants, clinical teams and those assessing patient outcomes were masked to the treatment allocation.

RESULTS: From December 2014 to October 2017, 8014 participants were assigned to the adrenaline ( n  = 4015) or to the placebo ( n  = 3999) arm. At 30 days, 130 out of 4012 participants (3.2%) in the adrenaline arm and 94 out of 3995 (2.4%) in the placebo arm were alive (adjusted odds ratio for survival 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.97). For secondary outcomes, survival to hospital admission was higher for those receiving adrenaline than for those receiving placebo (23.6% vs. 8.0%; adjusted odds ratio 3.83, 95% confidence interval 3.30 to 4.43). The rate of favourable neurological outcome at hospital discharge was not significantly different between the arms (2.2% vs. 1.9%; adjusted odds ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.68). The pattern of improved survival but no significant improvement in neurological outcomes continued through to 6 months. By 12 months, survival in the adrenaline arm was 2.7%, compared with 2.0% in the placebo arm (adjusted odds ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.92). An adjusted subgroup analysis did not identify significant interactions. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for adrenaline was estimated at £1,693,003 per quality-adjusted life-year gained over the first 6 months after the cardiac arrest event and £81,070 per quality-adjusted life-year gained over the lifetime of survivors. Additional economic analyses estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for adrenaline at £982,880 per percentage point increase in overall survival and £377,232 per percentage point increase in neurological outcomes over the first 6 months after the cardiac arrest.

LIMITATIONS: The estimate for survival with a favourable neurological outcome is imprecise because of the small numbers of patients surviving with a good outcome.

CONCLUSIONS: Adrenaline improved long-term survival, but there was no evidence that it significantly improved neurological outcomes. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-year exceeds the threshold of £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year usually supported by the NHS.

FUTURE WORK: Further research is required to better understand patients' preferences in relation to survival and neurological outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and to aid interpretation of the trial findings from a patient and public perspective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN73485024 and EudraCT 2014-000792-11.

FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 25. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Adult, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Epinephrine/therapeutic use, Humans, Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/drug therapy, Quality of Life, Quality-Adjusted Life Years
1366-5278
Perkins, Gavin D.
fd93b34c-2485-488a-8ab6-f8faf0690f73
Ji, Chen
ec0e8792-9309-4071-8517-e94966a81cf6
Achana, Felix
d72dd14c-1a24-4697-b2cf-9c19558d993b
Black, John J.M.
c9cf4036-ec61-4d6c-bf17-58cf338fdf06
Charlton, Karl
dc9ba396-4744-4104-9e01-f6df7053959a
Crawford, James
89074f21-c29d-4246-ba19-0517e7424740
de Paeztron, Adam
7faf872f-3dcc-4157-bc9d-ffe899477c5a
Deakin, Charles
560d993b-bbc9-4548-9990-272ed18a011d
Docherty, Mark
4c3d36b2-2d97-49be-85a9-05b8429695a1
Finn, Judith
0ee83a55-af5e-4888-85f5-def4257ec918
Fothergill, Rachael T.
42fb438d-876d-4bd5-8110-4de8378de764
Gates, Simon
13e2df22-7c78-4b49-a135-b26c328e6b79
Gunson, Imogen
2cec7a65-7607-42ae-a263-b799b2ca2b29
Han, Kyee
9e89af97-47f0-4341-b03e-b6dd0ba1829a
Hennings, Susie
ab7cd8d7-2206-425a-a72e-168fdcb7b96c
Horton, Jessica
7fe6f62c-a810-43d0-98eb-b32a495752db
Khan, Kamran
f55abc91-5af0-4175-a845-90e88ab2e45a
Lamb, Sarah
a0e4ca9d-cb5b-4ad7-b730-d1177e6d4ca0
Long, John
88e9bb8e-a873-4bf4-b402-7246d54daf70
Miller, Joshua
9c29b436-ca2c-48bf-875b-4c6324642c91
Moore, Fionna
76ef0994-40fe-47bd-a83c-a52ad291a0bf
Nolan, Jerry
89ed703a-50bd-4b8e-88cb-fc6e9d1245b1
O’shea, Lyndsey
2db98e21-aa3e-43fd-81ac-b8a6d9c5155a
Petrou, Stavros
5ee930f5-99db-4fb8-b401-95584cff0e20
Pocock, Helen
2380e94b-4916-4498-beac-dba8d2971bf4
Quinn, Tom
6be2aa1d-fc2f-4610-b8d0-4f85a74828ed
Rees, Nigel
b814e510-f411-4b89-ad48-ec4e9887f49e
Regan, Scott
c365c506-b06f-4566-b7cd-d7a87f1938ec
Rosser, Andy
cffd69df-82bb-4a53-9088-60a4deeaba86
Scomparin, Charlotte
3e64f513-e6d7-47e6-adba-3955cab6c514
Slowther, Anne
7f40cd71-c9de-47c8-8117-177955b2c909
Lall, Ranjit
2dd7769c-3fa4-43f5-942d-188f67c2bddd
Perkins, Gavin D.
fd93b34c-2485-488a-8ab6-f8faf0690f73
Ji, Chen
ec0e8792-9309-4071-8517-e94966a81cf6
Achana, Felix
d72dd14c-1a24-4697-b2cf-9c19558d993b
Black, John J.M.
c9cf4036-ec61-4d6c-bf17-58cf338fdf06
Charlton, Karl
dc9ba396-4744-4104-9e01-f6df7053959a
Crawford, James
89074f21-c29d-4246-ba19-0517e7424740
de Paeztron, Adam
7faf872f-3dcc-4157-bc9d-ffe899477c5a
Deakin, Charles
560d993b-bbc9-4548-9990-272ed18a011d
Docherty, Mark
4c3d36b2-2d97-49be-85a9-05b8429695a1
Finn, Judith
0ee83a55-af5e-4888-85f5-def4257ec918
Fothergill, Rachael T.
42fb438d-876d-4bd5-8110-4de8378de764
Gates, Simon
13e2df22-7c78-4b49-a135-b26c328e6b79
Gunson, Imogen
2cec7a65-7607-42ae-a263-b799b2ca2b29
Han, Kyee
9e89af97-47f0-4341-b03e-b6dd0ba1829a
Hennings, Susie
ab7cd8d7-2206-425a-a72e-168fdcb7b96c
Horton, Jessica
7fe6f62c-a810-43d0-98eb-b32a495752db
Khan, Kamran
f55abc91-5af0-4175-a845-90e88ab2e45a
Lamb, Sarah
a0e4ca9d-cb5b-4ad7-b730-d1177e6d4ca0
Long, John
88e9bb8e-a873-4bf4-b402-7246d54daf70
Miller, Joshua
9c29b436-ca2c-48bf-875b-4c6324642c91
Moore, Fionna
76ef0994-40fe-47bd-a83c-a52ad291a0bf
Nolan, Jerry
89ed703a-50bd-4b8e-88cb-fc6e9d1245b1
O’shea, Lyndsey
2db98e21-aa3e-43fd-81ac-b8a6d9c5155a
Petrou, Stavros
5ee930f5-99db-4fb8-b401-95584cff0e20
Pocock, Helen
2380e94b-4916-4498-beac-dba8d2971bf4
Quinn, Tom
6be2aa1d-fc2f-4610-b8d0-4f85a74828ed
Rees, Nigel
b814e510-f411-4b89-ad48-ec4e9887f49e
Regan, Scott
c365c506-b06f-4566-b7cd-d7a87f1938ec
Rosser, Andy
cffd69df-82bb-4a53-9088-60a4deeaba86
Scomparin, Charlotte
3e64f513-e6d7-47e6-adba-3955cab6c514
Slowther, Anne
7f40cd71-c9de-47c8-8117-177955b2c909
Lall, Ranjit
2dd7769c-3fa4-43f5-942d-188f67c2bddd

Perkins, Gavin D., Ji, Chen, Achana, Felix, Black, John J.M., Charlton, Karl, Crawford, James, de Paeztron, Adam, Deakin, Charles, Docherty, Mark, Finn, Judith, Fothergill, Rachael T., Gates, Simon, Gunson, Imogen, Han, Kyee, Hennings, Susie, Horton, Jessica, Khan, Kamran, Lamb, Sarah, Long, John, Miller, Joshua, Moore, Fionna, Nolan, Jerry, O’shea, Lyndsey, Petrou, Stavros, Pocock, Helen, Quinn, Tom, Rees, Nigel, Regan, Scott, Rosser, Andy, Scomparin, Charlotte, Slowther, Anne and Lall, Ranjit (2021) Adrenaline to improve survival in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: the PARAMEDIC2 RCT. Health Technology Assessment, 25 (25). (doi:10.3310/HTA25250).

Record type: Article

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Adrenaline has been used as a treatment for cardiac arrest for many years, despite uncertainty about its effects on long-term outcomes and concerns that it may cause worse neurological outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to evaluate the effects of adrenaline on survival and neurological outcomes, and to assess the cost-effectiveness of adrenaline use.

DESIGN: This was a pragmatic, randomised, allocation-concealed, placebo-controlled, parallel-group superiority trial and economic evaluation. Costs are expressed in Great British pounds and reported in 2016/17 prices.

SETTING: This trial was set in five NHS ambulance services in England and Wales.

PARTICIPANTS: Adults treated for an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were included. Patients were ineligible if they were pregnant, if they were aged < 16 years, if the cardiac arrest had been caused by anaphylaxis or life-threatening asthma, or if adrenaline had already been given.

INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to either adrenaline (1 mg) or placebo in a 1 : 1 allocation ratio by the opening of allocation-concealed treatment packs.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was survival to 30 days. The secondary outcomes were survival to hospital admission, survival to hospital discharge, survival at 3, 6 and 12 months, neurological outcomes and health-related quality of life through to 6 months. The economic evaluation assessed the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained from the perspective of the NHS and Personal Social Services. Participants, clinical teams and those assessing patient outcomes were masked to the treatment allocation.

RESULTS: From December 2014 to October 2017, 8014 participants were assigned to the adrenaline ( n  = 4015) or to the placebo ( n  = 3999) arm. At 30 days, 130 out of 4012 participants (3.2%) in the adrenaline arm and 94 out of 3995 (2.4%) in the placebo arm were alive (adjusted odds ratio for survival 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.97). For secondary outcomes, survival to hospital admission was higher for those receiving adrenaline than for those receiving placebo (23.6% vs. 8.0%; adjusted odds ratio 3.83, 95% confidence interval 3.30 to 4.43). The rate of favourable neurological outcome at hospital discharge was not significantly different between the arms (2.2% vs. 1.9%; adjusted odds ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.68). The pattern of improved survival but no significant improvement in neurological outcomes continued through to 6 months. By 12 months, survival in the adrenaline arm was 2.7%, compared with 2.0% in the placebo arm (adjusted odds ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.92). An adjusted subgroup analysis did not identify significant interactions. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for adrenaline was estimated at £1,693,003 per quality-adjusted life-year gained over the first 6 months after the cardiac arrest event and £81,070 per quality-adjusted life-year gained over the lifetime of survivors. Additional economic analyses estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for adrenaline at £982,880 per percentage point increase in overall survival and £377,232 per percentage point increase in neurological outcomes over the first 6 months after the cardiac arrest.

LIMITATIONS: The estimate for survival with a favourable neurological outcome is imprecise because of the small numbers of patients surviving with a good outcome.

CONCLUSIONS: Adrenaline improved long-term survival, but there was no evidence that it significantly improved neurological outcomes. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-year exceeds the threshold of £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year usually supported by the NHS.

FUTURE WORK: Further research is required to better understand patients' preferences in relation to survival and neurological outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and to aid interpretation of the trial findings from a patient and public perspective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN73485024 and EudraCT 2014-000792-11.

FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 25. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Text
3036389 - Version of Record
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (3MB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 1 July 2020
Published date: 15 April 2021
Additional Information: Funding Information: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 25. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Funding Information: The trial was approved by the South Central Oxford C Research Ethics Committee (reference number 14/SC/0157) and the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (EudraCT number 2014-000792-11). The trial was sponsored by the University of Warwick and was conducted in accordance with the Directive 2001/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 [European Commission. Clinical Trials – Directive 2001/20/EC. URL: https://ec.europa.eu/health/human-use/clinical-trials/directive_en (accessed 23 September 2020)], The Medicines for Human Use Act (Clinical Trial) Regulations, Statutory Instrument 2004 No. 1031 and Amendment (No.2) Statutory Instrument 2006 No. 2984 [Great Britain. The Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004. London: The Stationery Office; 2004 (and amendment in 2006)]. Funding Information: The trial was approved by the South Central Oxford C REC (reference number 14/SC/0157) and the MHRA (EudraCT number 2014-000792-11). The trial was sponsored by the University of Warwick and was conducted in accordance with the Directive 2001/20/EC122 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 and The Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations act,123 statutory instrument 2004 No. 1031 and amendment (No. 2) statutory instrument 2006 No. 2984. Funding Information: Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 25. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Funding Information: The research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the HTA programme as project number 12/127/126. The contractual start date was in March 2014. The draft report began editorial review in August 2019 and was accepted for publication in July 2020. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HTA editors and publisher have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors’ report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the draft document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report. Publisher Copyright: © 2021 Perkins et al. Copyright: Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
Keywords: Adult, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Epinephrine/therapeutic use, Humans, Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/drug therapy, Quality of Life, Quality-Adjusted Life Years

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 453265
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/453265
ISSN: 1366-5278
PURE UUID: 354d8ba0-b212-4ab6-9c5f-c324e0ec5cc5

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 11 Jan 2022 17:50
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 12:52

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Gavin D. Perkins
Author: Chen Ji
Author: Felix Achana
Author: John J.M. Black
Author: Karl Charlton
Author: James Crawford
Author: Adam de Paeztron
Author: Charles Deakin
Author: Mark Docherty
Author: Judith Finn
Author: Rachael T. Fothergill
Author: Simon Gates
Author: Imogen Gunson
Author: Kyee Han
Author: Susie Hennings
Author: Jessica Horton
Author: Kamran Khan
Author: Sarah Lamb
Author: John Long
Author: Joshua Miller
Author: Fionna Moore
Author: Jerry Nolan
Author: Lyndsey O’shea
Author: Stavros Petrou
Author: Helen Pocock
Author: Tom Quinn
Author: Nigel Rees
Author: Scott Regan
Author: Andy Rosser
Author: Charlotte Scomparin
Author: Anne Slowther
Author: Ranjit Lall

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×