Clinical paperAssociation between Cerebral Performance Category, Modified Rankin Scale, and discharge disposition after cardiac arrest☆
Introduction
Determining the neurological and physical disability status of cardiac arrest survivors is important for evaluating the outcome of resuscitation interventions. The Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) has been the traditional standard outcome measure for cardiac arrest survivors and can be determined through chart review.1, 2, 3 However, previous work demonstrated that the CPC has limited ability to discriminate between mild and moderate brain injury.4 The Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) has been used as a measurement of global disability in stroke, brain injury, and neurosurgical patients.5, 6, 7 The mRS has some similarity to the CPC, though more focused on functional domains, and can also be determined using chart review.8 Finally, discharge disposition has been used as a surrogate for the CPC or mRS on the assumption that disposition is largely determined by patient condition.9, 10, 11
Presently, several definitions of a “good outcome” are used in the literature, each based on summative outcome measures. In previous work, good outcome after cardiac arrest has been defined as a CPC of 1–2,12 mRS of 0–3,13 or discharge disposition to home or acute rehabilitation facility.10, 11 While these measures are used interchangeably to define “good outcome”, it is unknown which of these measures are most useful or reliable for describing the patient outcome at discharge, because each of these measures is differentially affected by four factors: cognitive and physical impairments, recovery of function, and ability to participate in everyday life. Furthermore, the CPC, mRS and discharge disposition are global scores that each place different emphases on these factors. The utility of discharge disposition lies only in its ability to capture current status and predict future outcomes. However, the CPC and mRS can be repeated over time, thus capturing short and long-term patient outcomes. Like discharge disposition, scores at discharge may be used to predict future patient outcomes.
It is critical for clinical studies to employ a valid and reliable outcome measure, and it is desirable to be able to compare studies that use different outcome measures. However, there is a paucity of comparative performance data about the CPC, mRS and discharge disposition. Therefore, this study examined the association among the CPC, mRS, and discharge disposition as outcome descriptors in a well-characterized cardiac arrest population. For the CPC and mRS we also determined the intra- and inter-rater reliability of assessment from chart review. This study tested the hypothesis that these different outcomes would be strongly associated with each other.
Section snippets
Participants and procedures
We completed a retrospective review of all subjects >18 years of age and resuscitated following either in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) or out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) who survived to hospital discharge in a single tertiary care facility between 1/1/2006 and 12/31/2009. Since 2007, this facility has incorporated a comprehensive post-cardiac arrest care program that includes use of therapeutic hypothermia for all comatose post-cardiac arrest patients regardless of initial cardiac
Results
Of the 512 subjects treated during the study period, 216 (42%) survived and had outcome measures determined. Five subjects were transferred to other hospitals, two due to insurance coverage and three due to psychiatric illness. These 5 subjects were excluded from analysis leaving 211 subjects for analysis.
Mean age was 60 years (SD 16) and the majority (75%) was white males (Table 2). IHCA and OHCA were equally prevalent, and ventricular dysrhythmia was most common (N = 109, 52%). Half of the
Discussion
The purpose of the study was to examine associations among CPC, mRS, and discharge disposition. These results do not support our hypothesis that these different outcome measures are strongly associated with each other. In contrast, significant variability exists among CPC, mRS, and discharge disposition as outcome measures. Relationships among these measures range from poor to fair. Thus, the percentage of subjects demonstrating a “good outcome” following cardiac arrest varies greatly depending
Conclusion
Determination of the CPC, mRS and disposition at hospital discharge after cardiac arrest is reliable from chart review using standardized instruments. However, different instruments provide widely differing estimates of “good outcome”. Agreement between these measures ranges from poor to fair. A more nuanced outcome measure specifically designed for the post-cardiac arrest population is needed.
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.
Acknowledgements
Dr. Rittenberger is supported by Grant Number 1KL2RR024154-02 from the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and NIH Roadmap for Medical Research. Dr. Rittenberger is also supported by an unrestricted grant from the National Association of EMS Physicians/Zoll EMS Resuscitation Research Fellowship.
Drs. Raina, Holm, and Callaway received support from the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (5U01
References (23)
- et al.
Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage
Lancet
(1975) - et al.
Neurological and functional status following cardiac arrest: method and tool utility
Resuscitation
(2008) - et al.
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation in critically ill neurologic–neurosurgical patients
Mayo Clin Proc
(2004) - et al.
Outcomes of a hospital-wide plan to improve care of comatose survivors of cardiac arrest
Resuscitation
(2008) - et al.
Resuscitation outcomes consortium (ROC) PRIMED cardiac arrest trial methods part 1: rationale and methodology for the impedance threshold device (ITD) protocol
Resuscitation
(2008) - et al.
Assessment of neurological prognosis in comatose survivors of cardiac arrrest. BRCT I Study group
Lancet
(1994) - et al.
Quality-of-life and formal functional testing of survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest correlates poorly with traditional neurologic outcome scales
Ann Emerg Med
(1996) Randomized clinical study of thiopental loading in comatose survivors of cardiac arrest
N Engl J Med
(1986)- et al.
Recommended guidelines for reviewing, reporting, and conducting research on in-hospital resuscitation: the in-hospital ‘Utstein Style’: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association, the European Resuscitation Council, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, the Australian Resuscitation Council, and the Resuscitation Councils of Southern Africa
Circulation
(1997) - et al.
Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients
Stroke
(1988)
Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in closed head injury: High correlation with initial Glasgow Coma Scale score and score on Modified Rankin Scale at discharge
Radiology
Cited by (181)
Neuroprognostication in the Post Cardiac Arrest Patient: A Canadian Cardiovascular Society Position Statement
2023, Canadian Journal of Cardiology
- ☆
A Spanish translated version of the summary of this article appears as Appendix in the final online version at doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2011.03.034.