Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation: The need for high-quality research and the association legal, ethical and pandemic-related challenges

Top 5 barriers in cardiac arrest research as perceived by international early career researchers - A consensus study

Aim of the study

Cardiac arrest research has not received as much scientific attention as research on other topics. Here, we aimed to identify cardiac arrest research barriers from the perspective of an international group of early career researchers.

Methods

Attendees of the 2022 international masterclass on cardiac arrest registry research accompanied the Global Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Registry collaborative meeting in Utstein, Norway, and used an adapted hybrid nominal group technique to obtain a diverse and comprehensive perspective. Barriers were identified using a web-based questionnaire and discussed and ranked during an in-person follow-up meeting. After each response was discussed and clarified, barriers were categorized and ranked over two rounds. Each participant scored these from 1 (least significant) to 5 (most significant).

Results

Nine participants generated 36 responses, forming seven overall categories of cardiac arrest research barriers. "Allocated research time" was ranked first in both rounds. "Scientific environment", including appropriate mentorship and support systems, ranked second in the final ranking. "Resources", including funding and infrastructure, ranked third. "Access to and availability of cardiac arrest research data" was the fourth-ranked barrier. This included data from the cardiac arrest registries, medical devices, and clinical studies. Finally, "uniqueness" was the fifth-ranked barrier. This included ethical issues, patient recruitment challenges, and unique characteristics of cardiac arrest.

Conclusion

By identifying cardiac arrest research barriers and suggesting solutions, this study may act as a tool for stakeholders to focus on helping early career researchers overcome these barriers, thus paving the road for future research.

The Right to Refuse: Understanding Healthcare Providers' Perspectives on Patient Autonomy in Emergency Care

Healthcare providers in prehospital care and emergency departments are often at the frontline of medical crises, facing a range of ethical dilemmas, particularly when it comes to patients refusing treatment. This study aimed to delve into the attitudes of these providers toward treatment refusal, unearthing the strategies they employ in navigating such challenging situations while actively working in prehospital emergency health services. Our findings showed that, as the participants' age and experience increased, so did their inclination to respect patient autonomy and avoid persuading them to change their decision about treatment. It was noted that doctors, paramedics, and emergency medical technicians demonstrated a deeper understanding of patients' rights than other medical specialists. However, even with this understanding, the prioritization of patients' rights tended to diminish in life-threatening situations, giving rise to ethical dilemmas. This underlines the complexity of balancing the healthcare professionals' responsibilities and the patients' autonomy, which can generate ethically challenging scenarios for those working in emergency healthcare. By investigating these attitudes and experiences, this study seeks to foster a more profound understanding of the ethical quandaries faced by emergency healthcare providers. Our ultimate aim is to contribute to the development of effective strategies that support both patients and professionals in managing these tough circumstances.