(Circulation. 1995;92:149-151.)
© 1995 American Heart Association, Inc.
Articles |
From the American Heart Association Office of Public Affairs, Washington, DC.
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In the May 1991 edition of Circulation, the American Heart Association (AHA) unveiled its "chain of survival" concept. The chain details the sequence of events needed to ensure that more people can survive sudden cardiac arrest. The links of the chain included early access to the emergency system, early cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), early defibrillation, and early advanced cardiac life support.
In the article, the Emergency Cardiac Care Committee of the AHA set forth a series of recommendations to strengthen the chain of survival. Among the suggestions with public policy ramifications are the following: (1) all communities should implement an enhanced 911 system; (2) communities should adopt more widespread and effective targeted CPR programs; (3) communities should implement programs to establish dispatcher-assisted CPR; and (4) all communities should adopt the principle of early defibrillation, including making automatic external defibrillators (AEDs) available to first responders trained in their use.
| Chain of Survival Legislation |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The legislation, sponsored by Gerry E. Studds (D-10-MA), directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to provide states with recommendations on a variety of issues, including lifesaving first aid and CPR training for 911 dispatchers, firefighters, teachers, and day-care providers. Further, recommendations regarding AEDs would address the placement of the devices in emergency vehicles and large buildings, stadiums, and arenas; the need for removing barriers to expanding the pool of emergency personnel and first responders authorized to use the device; and the modification of tort laws regarding its use.
The placement of AEDs in the hands of large numbers of people appropriately trained in their use is essential for increased survival of cardiac arrest. In light of this, measures need to be taken to facilitate the placement and proper use of defibrillators in all large gathering places. Ambulances should be equipped with defibrillators, and all traditional first responders to emergencies should be trained in the use of the devices.
The current programs to teach CPR have been very successful in many areas. It is clear, however, that these programs have not penetrated large segments of the population and, without change, will have little effect on cardiac mortality in such groups. In the schools, a 1986 study published in the Journal of Emergency Medical Services found that only six states and the District of Columbia required training in secondary schools, and eight had pending legislation. The situation has not dramatically changed since that time.
The legislation calls upon the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a program aimed at providing recommendations to the states and the federal government that will increase the likelihood of survival from sudden cardiac arrest. The Secretary will be instructed by Congress to make recommendations to states to ensure proper implementation of the chain of survival, including recommendations relative to first aid, CPR training, and access to emergency medical services through the 911 system. States will evaluate the merits of training in lifesaving first aid for law enforcement officers, firefighters, teachers, athletic coaches, day-care providers, and other potential first responders. As for the use and location of AEDs, states will determine the merits of training additional health professionals and the general public. The bill also requires the development of federal policies relative to federal facilities and employees. Tort reform issues are also addressed in the legislation.
The legislation has already been endorsed by the American Red Cross, the American Association of Critical Care Nurses, and the National Association of EMS Physicians.
| Transportation Appropriations |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| ACEP Bill |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Anecdotal information from ACEP cites numerous troublesome cases, including a woman who delayed calling 911 for 2 hours while she attempted to contact her primary care doctor, as required by her HMO, while her husband experienced chest pain and vomiting. The woman did not call 911 until her husband collapsed. The husband later died.
| Informed Consent |
|---|
|
|
|---|
As summarized in the document, there are many acute clinical situations for which no effective treatment is available. In these cases, the use of an experimental treatment may be beneficial. Normally, human subjects must give informed consent for either standard or experimental treatments. However, prospective informed consent for standard or experimental treatment in the emergency setting is often impractical and sometimes impossible when patients are suffering from a cardiac arrest, severe head injury, drug overdose, stroke, or other catastrophic medical or traumatic event. Entry of critically ill patients into an emergency research protocol without consent has been shown to be not only acceptable to but also appreciated by the patients' families, who, in most cases, allowed continued participation in the protocol.
The consensus recommendations include the promulgation of federal regulations that explicitly address the investigation of emergency therapies for patients unable to give informed consent. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) regulations that are developed should be complete and compatible. A new risk category, "appropriate incremental risk," should be defined for studies that propose to forgo consent in emergency research. Appropriate incremental risk is an amount of incremental risk that is acceptable to the vast majority of potential patients.
On January 9 and 10, 1995, the FDA and National Institutes of Health held a Public Forum on Informed Consent in Clinical Research Conducted in Emergency Circumstances. Joseph Ornato, MD, chair of the AHA's Emergency Cardiac Care Committee, spoke on behalf of the AHA. Numerous examples of hardships resulting from the current regulations were presented to participants.
Numerous meetings in the Senate and House and with the FDA have been held since January. Senator Nancy Kassebaum (R-KS) and Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) are among legislators showing an interest in the issues. Although legislation has been drafted to address the issue, it now appears likely that DHHS and FDA regulations regarding waivers of consent will soon be forthcoming. Initial reports from DHHS have been very encouraging as to the content of the regulations.
| FDA Reform |
|---|
|
|
|---|
"The AHA believes that like much of what is transpiring in our society, the FDA needs to ensure that it is keeping up with the technological revolution, that it is meeting the needs, challenges, and opportunities of our society. However, it should not forgo its primary responsibilities to the American public to ensure that the foods, drugs, and medical devices the public consumes are safe, effective, and properly manufactured and distributed."
In April 1995, as Congress was just beginning its public investigatory process, the Clinton Administration submitted an opening salvo in the debate by releasing its Reinventing Drug and Medical Device Regulations recommendations, part of the National Performance Review headed by Vice President Al Gore. The report addressed the financial burdens of FDA device regulations and looked for ways to eliminate those burdens that had created barriers to bringing beneficial new products to market. Among the FDA's reform recommendations are proposals to expedite product review, eliminate unnecessary requirements that will not adversely affect public health, and use more automated technology.
| Biomaterials Shortage Act |
|---|
|
|
|---|
A group of legislators, led by Joseph I. Lieberman (D-CT) and George W. Gekas (R-17-PA), introduced the Biomaterials Access Assurance Act. Under the legislation, biomaterials suppliers would not be liable for harm to a claimant caused by an implant unless they furnish raw materials or component parts that fail to meet applicable contractual requirements or specifications. This legislation would establish a procedure to ensure that suppliers can avoid litigation without incurring heavy legal costs, while not diminishing the existing liability of medical device manufacturers. The AHA actively supports this legislation.
The Biomaterials Access Assurance Act language was included in the omnibus product liability legislation being considered by the Congress, the Product Liability Fairness Act of 1995. The legislation has passed both houses and gone to a conference committee.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. I. Nwogu, D. Geenen, M. Bean, M. C. Brenner, X. Huang, and P. M. Buttrick Inhibition of Collagen Synthesis With Prolyl 4-Hydroxylase Inhibitor Improves Left Ventricular Function and Alters the Pattern of Left Ventricular Dilatation After Myocardial Infarction Circulation, October 30, 2001; 104(18): 2216 - 2221. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. B. Soumerai, T. J. McLaughlin, J. H. Gurwitz, S. Pearson, C. L. Christiansen, C. Borbas, N. Morris, B. McLaughlin, X. Gao, and D. Ross-Degnan Timeliness and Quality of Care for Elderly Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Under Health Maintenance Organization vs Fee-for-Service Insurance Arch Intern Med, September 27, 1999; 159(17): 2013 - 2020. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 1995 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |