Abstract
The chain of survival aims to demonstrate the interrelationship between key stages
of resuscitation and emphasises the need for all links to be effective in order to
optimise the chances of survival. The contribution of each of the four links diminishes
rapidly as patients succumb at each stage and the actual attrition rate results in
rapidly decreasing numbers of patients progressing along the chain.
This revised representation adjusts the area of each link in order to graphically
represent the flow of patients through the chain. Greatest benefit in improving outcome
will be achieved by focussing on improving care at links in the chain where there
is the greatest number of patients.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to ResuscitationAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- European Resuscitation Council guidelines for resuscitation 2005. Section 1. Introduction.Resuscitation. 2005; 67: S3-S6https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2005.10.002
- The chain of survival.Resuscitation. 2006; 71: 270-271https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2006.09.001
- Improving survival from sudden cardiac arrest: the chain of survival concept: A statement for health professionals from the Advanced Cardiac Life Support Subcommittee and the Emergency Cardiac Care Committee. American Heart Association.Circulation. 1991; 83: 1832-1847
- Expanding the first link in the chain of survival – experiences from dispatcher referral of callers to AED locations.Resuscitation. 2016; 107: 129-134https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.06.022
- What stops hospital clinical staff from following protocols? An analysis of the incidence and factors behind the failure of bedside clinical staff to activate the rapid response system in a multi-campus Australian metropolitan healthcare service.BMJ Qual Saf. 2012; 21: 569-575https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000692
- National initiatives to improve outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in England.Emerg Med J. 2016; 33: 448-451https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2015-204847
- European Resuscitation Council guidelines for resuscitation 2015: section 2. Adult basic life support and automated external defibrillation.Resuscitation. 2015; 95: 81-99https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.07.015
- EuReCa ONE-27 nations, ONE, Europe, ONE registry: a prospective one month analysis of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes in 27 countries in Europe.Resuscitation. 2016; 105: 188-195https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.06.004
- Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest surveillance – cardiac arrest registry to enhance survival (CARES), United States, October 1, 2005–December 31, 2010.MMWR Surveill Summ. 2011; 60: 1-19
- Incidence and outcome of in-hospital cardiac arrest in the United Kingdom national cardiac arrest audit.Resuscitation. 2014; 85: 987-992https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.04.002
- Incidence and outcome of in-hospital cardiac arrest in Italy: a multicentre observational study in the Piedmont Region.Resuscitation. 2017; 119: 48-55https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.06.020
Article info
Publication history
Published online: February 19, 2018
Accepted:
February 14,
2018
Received in revised form:
February 9,
2018
Received:
January 25,
2018
Identification
Copyright
© 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
