Key result
European survey finds ~23% of resuscitation councils lack in-hospital cardiac arrest registries.
Why the study?
Data collection through registries is key to measuring and improving resuscitation outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest, but the current landscape of IHCA registries in Europe was unclear.
Cross-Sectional (n=30)
Yes
There is considerable variation in the existence and data collection practices of in-hospital cardiac arrest registries across European nations, highlighting a gap in tracking long-term outcomes.
Variation in European IHCA registries may limit outcome benchmarking; leaves open feasibility of standardized tracking amid logistical barriers.
Background In-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) has a high mortality rate. To measure and improve resuscitation outcomes, data collection through registries plays a key role. This study aims to evaluate the current landscape of IHCA registries across national resuscitation councils affiliated with the European Resuscitation Council. Methods A cross-sectional survey was distributed among national resuscitation councils collecting data on the presence and type of IHCA registries, registry coverage and data variables collected. Findings informed an expert discussion on barriers and enablers establishing such registries and potential next steps. Results 30/34 (88%) national resuscitation councils replied to the survey. Seven have no IHCA registry (23%), 11 a local registry (37%), two a local and regional registry (7%), five a national registry (17%), and two countries participate in a national registry in another country (7%). Of the included registries 17 (94%) are collecting cardiac arrests in adults, 13 (72%) in children, and four (22%) in neonates. Most registries are collecting location of cardiac arrest (95%), the initial rhythm (95%), and if return of spontaneous circulation is achieved (100%), while long term neurological outcome is only collected by four registries (21%). Overall, the AI-assisted descriptive content analysis demonstrated broad consensus regarding the value of registries, while highlighting substantial logistical, legal, and financial barriers. Conclusion Our survey demonstrates considerable variation in the existence, population coverage, and data collection practices of IHCA registries. While core cardiac arrest variables are collected by most registries, data on long-term outcomes remain limited.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Veigl et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in In-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) (n=30). Cross-sectional survey of IHCA registries was evaluated on Presence and type of IHCA registries, registry coverage, and data variables collected. A survey of 30 European national resuscitation councils found that 23% have no in-hospital cardiac arrest registry, and only 21% of existing registries collect long-term neurological outcomes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: