The Experts below are selected from a list of 51 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Allan R De Caen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
part 6 pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support 2015 international consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations reprint
Pediatrics, 2015Co-Authors: Allan R De Caen, Dianne L Atkins, Monica E Kleinman, Peter A Meaney, Ian Maconochie, Richard Aickin, Dominique Biarent, Annemarie Guerguerian, David Kloeck, Vinay NadkarniAbstract:Reprint: The American Heart Association requests that this document be cited as follows: de Caen AR, Maconochie IK, Aickin R, Atkins DL, Biarent D, Guerguerian AM, Kleinman ME, Kloeck DA, Meaney PA, Nadkarni VM, Ng KC, Nuthall G, Reis AG, Shimizu N, Tibballs J, Veliz Pintos R; on behalf of the Pediatric Basic Life Support and Pediatric Advanced Life Support Chapter Collaborators. Part 6: pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. Circulation . 2015;132(suppl 1):S177–S203. Reprinted with permission of the American Heart Association, Inc., European Resuscitation Council, and International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. This article has been published in Circulation and Resuscitation . ( Circulation. 2015;132[suppl 1]:S177–S203. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000275.) The Pediatric Task Force reviewed all questions submitted by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) member councils in 2010, reviewed all council training materials and resuscitation guidelines and algorithms, and conferred on recent areas of interest and controversy. We identified a few areas where there were key differences in council-specific guidelines based on historical recommendations, such as the A-B-C (Airway, Breathing, Circulation) versus C-A-B (Circulation, Airway, Breathing) sequence of provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), initial back blows versus Abdominal Thrusts for foreign-body airway obstruction, an upper limit for recommended chest compression rate, and initial defibrillation dose for shockable rhythms (2 versus 4 J/kg). We produced a working list of prioritized questions and topics, which was adjusted with the advent of new research evidence. This led to a prioritized palate of 21 PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) questions for ILCOR task force focus. The 2015 process was supported by information specialists who performed in-depth systematic searches, liaising with pediatric content experts so that the most appropriate terms and outcomes and the most relevant publications were identified. …
-
part 6 pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support 2015 international consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations
Circulation, 2015Co-Authors: Allan R De Caen, Dianne L Atkins, Monica E Kleinman, Peter A Meaney, Ian Maconochie, Richard Aickin, Dominique Biarent, Annemarie Guerguerian, David Kloeck, Vinay M NadkarniAbstract:The Pediatric Task Force reviewed all questions submitted by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) member councils in 2010, reviewed all council training materials and resuscitation guidelines and algorithms, and conferred on recent areas of interest and controversy. We identified a few areas where there were key differences in council-specific guidelines based on historical recommendations, such as the A-B-C (Airway, Breathing, Circulation) versus C-A-B (Circulation, Airway, Breathing) sequence of provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), initial back blows versus Abdominal Thrusts for foreign-body airway obstruction, an upper limit for recommended chest compression rate, and initial defibrillation dose for shockable rhythms (2 versus 4 J/kg). We produced a working list of prioritized questions and topics, which was adjusted with the advent of new research evidence. This led to a prioritized palate of 21 PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) questions for ILCOR task force focus. The 2015 process was supported by information specialists who performed in-depth systematic searches, liaising with pediatric content experts so that the most appropriate terms and outcomes and the most relevant publications were identified. Relevant adult literature was considered (extrapolated) in those PICO questions that overlapped with other task forces, or when there were insufficient pediatric data. In rare circumstances (in the absence of sufficient human data), appropriate animal studies were incorporated into reviews of the literature. However, these data were considered only when higher levels of evidence were not available and the topic was deemed critical. When formulating the PICO questions, the task force felt it important to evaluate patient outcomes that extend beyond return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) or discharge from the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). In recognition that the measures must have meaning, not only to clinicians but also to parents and caregivers, longer-term outcomes at 30 …
Vinay Nadkarni - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
part 6 pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support 2015 international consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations reprint
Pediatrics, 2015Co-Authors: Allan R De Caen, Dianne L Atkins, Monica E Kleinman, Peter A Meaney, Ian Maconochie, Richard Aickin, Dominique Biarent, Annemarie Guerguerian, David Kloeck, Vinay NadkarniAbstract:Reprint: The American Heart Association requests that this document be cited as follows: de Caen AR, Maconochie IK, Aickin R, Atkins DL, Biarent D, Guerguerian AM, Kleinman ME, Kloeck DA, Meaney PA, Nadkarni VM, Ng KC, Nuthall G, Reis AG, Shimizu N, Tibballs J, Veliz Pintos R; on behalf of the Pediatric Basic Life Support and Pediatric Advanced Life Support Chapter Collaborators. Part 6: pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. Circulation . 2015;132(suppl 1):S177–S203. Reprinted with permission of the American Heart Association, Inc., European Resuscitation Council, and International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. This article has been published in Circulation and Resuscitation . ( Circulation. 2015;132[suppl 1]:S177–S203. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000275.) The Pediatric Task Force reviewed all questions submitted by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) member councils in 2010, reviewed all council training materials and resuscitation guidelines and algorithms, and conferred on recent areas of interest and controversy. We identified a few areas where there were key differences in council-specific guidelines based on historical recommendations, such as the A-B-C (Airway, Breathing, Circulation) versus C-A-B (Circulation, Airway, Breathing) sequence of provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), initial back blows versus Abdominal Thrusts for foreign-body airway obstruction, an upper limit for recommended chest compression rate, and initial defibrillation dose for shockable rhythms (2 versus 4 J/kg). We produced a working list of prioritized questions and topics, which was adjusted with the advent of new research evidence. This led to a prioritized palate of 21 PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) questions for ILCOR task force focus. The 2015 process was supported by information specialists who performed in-depth systematic searches, liaising with pediatric content experts so that the most appropriate terms and outcomes and the most relevant publications were identified. …
Peter A Meaney - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
part 6 pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support 2015 international consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations reprint
Pediatrics, 2015Co-Authors: Allan R De Caen, Dianne L Atkins, Monica E Kleinman, Peter A Meaney, Ian Maconochie, Richard Aickin, Dominique Biarent, Annemarie Guerguerian, David Kloeck, Vinay NadkarniAbstract:Reprint: The American Heart Association requests that this document be cited as follows: de Caen AR, Maconochie IK, Aickin R, Atkins DL, Biarent D, Guerguerian AM, Kleinman ME, Kloeck DA, Meaney PA, Nadkarni VM, Ng KC, Nuthall G, Reis AG, Shimizu N, Tibballs J, Veliz Pintos R; on behalf of the Pediatric Basic Life Support and Pediatric Advanced Life Support Chapter Collaborators. Part 6: pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. Circulation . 2015;132(suppl 1):S177–S203. Reprinted with permission of the American Heart Association, Inc., European Resuscitation Council, and International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. This article has been published in Circulation and Resuscitation . ( Circulation. 2015;132[suppl 1]:S177–S203. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000275.) The Pediatric Task Force reviewed all questions submitted by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) member councils in 2010, reviewed all council training materials and resuscitation guidelines and algorithms, and conferred on recent areas of interest and controversy. We identified a few areas where there were key differences in council-specific guidelines based on historical recommendations, such as the A-B-C (Airway, Breathing, Circulation) versus C-A-B (Circulation, Airway, Breathing) sequence of provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), initial back blows versus Abdominal Thrusts for foreign-body airway obstruction, an upper limit for recommended chest compression rate, and initial defibrillation dose for shockable rhythms (2 versus 4 J/kg). We produced a working list of prioritized questions and topics, which was adjusted with the advent of new research evidence. This led to a prioritized palate of 21 PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) questions for ILCOR task force focus. The 2015 process was supported by information specialists who performed in-depth systematic searches, liaising with pediatric content experts so that the most appropriate terms and outcomes and the most relevant publications were identified. …
-
part 6 pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support 2015 international consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations
Circulation, 2015Co-Authors: Allan R De Caen, Dianne L Atkins, Monica E Kleinman, Peter A Meaney, Ian Maconochie, Richard Aickin, Dominique Biarent, Annemarie Guerguerian, David Kloeck, Vinay M NadkarniAbstract:The Pediatric Task Force reviewed all questions submitted by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) member councils in 2010, reviewed all council training materials and resuscitation guidelines and algorithms, and conferred on recent areas of interest and controversy. We identified a few areas where there were key differences in council-specific guidelines based on historical recommendations, such as the A-B-C (Airway, Breathing, Circulation) versus C-A-B (Circulation, Airway, Breathing) sequence of provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), initial back blows versus Abdominal Thrusts for foreign-body airway obstruction, an upper limit for recommended chest compression rate, and initial defibrillation dose for shockable rhythms (2 versus 4 J/kg). We produced a working list of prioritized questions and topics, which was adjusted with the advent of new research evidence. This led to a prioritized palate of 21 PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) questions for ILCOR task force focus. The 2015 process was supported by information specialists who performed in-depth systematic searches, liaising with pediatric content experts so that the most appropriate terms and outcomes and the most relevant publications were identified. Relevant adult literature was considered (extrapolated) in those PICO questions that overlapped with other task forces, or when there were insufficient pediatric data. In rare circumstances (in the absence of sufficient human data), appropriate animal studies were incorporated into reviews of the literature. However, these data were considered only when higher levels of evidence were not available and the topic was deemed critical. When formulating the PICO questions, the task force felt it important to evaluate patient outcomes that extend beyond return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) or discharge from the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). In recognition that the measures must have meaning, not only to clinicians but also to parents and caregivers, longer-term outcomes at 30 …
David Kloeck - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
part 6 pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support 2015 international consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations reprint
Pediatrics, 2015Co-Authors: Allan R De Caen, Dianne L Atkins, Monica E Kleinman, Peter A Meaney, Ian Maconochie, Richard Aickin, Dominique Biarent, Annemarie Guerguerian, David Kloeck, Vinay NadkarniAbstract:Reprint: The American Heart Association requests that this document be cited as follows: de Caen AR, Maconochie IK, Aickin R, Atkins DL, Biarent D, Guerguerian AM, Kleinman ME, Kloeck DA, Meaney PA, Nadkarni VM, Ng KC, Nuthall G, Reis AG, Shimizu N, Tibballs J, Veliz Pintos R; on behalf of the Pediatric Basic Life Support and Pediatric Advanced Life Support Chapter Collaborators. Part 6: pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. Circulation . 2015;132(suppl 1):S177–S203. Reprinted with permission of the American Heart Association, Inc., European Resuscitation Council, and International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. This article has been published in Circulation and Resuscitation . ( Circulation. 2015;132[suppl 1]:S177–S203. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000275.) The Pediatric Task Force reviewed all questions submitted by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) member councils in 2010, reviewed all council training materials and resuscitation guidelines and algorithms, and conferred on recent areas of interest and controversy. We identified a few areas where there were key differences in council-specific guidelines based on historical recommendations, such as the A-B-C (Airway, Breathing, Circulation) versus C-A-B (Circulation, Airway, Breathing) sequence of provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), initial back blows versus Abdominal Thrusts for foreign-body airway obstruction, an upper limit for recommended chest compression rate, and initial defibrillation dose for shockable rhythms (2 versus 4 J/kg). We produced a working list of prioritized questions and topics, which was adjusted with the advent of new research evidence. This led to a prioritized palate of 21 PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) questions for ILCOR task force focus. The 2015 process was supported by information specialists who performed in-depth systematic searches, liaising with pediatric content experts so that the most appropriate terms and outcomes and the most relevant publications were identified. …
-
part 6 pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support 2015 international consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations
Circulation, 2015Co-Authors: Allan R De Caen, Dianne L Atkins, Monica E Kleinman, Peter A Meaney, Ian Maconochie, Richard Aickin, Dominique Biarent, Annemarie Guerguerian, David Kloeck, Vinay M NadkarniAbstract:The Pediatric Task Force reviewed all questions submitted by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) member councils in 2010, reviewed all council training materials and resuscitation guidelines and algorithms, and conferred on recent areas of interest and controversy. We identified a few areas where there were key differences in council-specific guidelines based on historical recommendations, such as the A-B-C (Airway, Breathing, Circulation) versus C-A-B (Circulation, Airway, Breathing) sequence of provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), initial back blows versus Abdominal Thrusts for foreign-body airway obstruction, an upper limit for recommended chest compression rate, and initial defibrillation dose for shockable rhythms (2 versus 4 J/kg). We produced a working list of prioritized questions and topics, which was adjusted with the advent of new research evidence. This led to a prioritized palate of 21 PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) questions for ILCOR task force focus. The 2015 process was supported by information specialists who performed in-depth systematic searches, liaising with pediatric content experts so that the most appropriate terms and outcomes and the most relevant publications were identified. Relevant adult literature was considered (extrapolated) in those PICO questions that overlapped with other task forces, or when there were insufficient pediatric data. In rare circumstances (in the absence of sufficient human data), appropriate animal studies were incorporated into reviews of the literature. However, these data were considered only when higher levels of evidence were not available and the topic was deemed critical. When formulating the PICO questions, the task force felt it important to evaluate patient outcomes that extend beyond return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) or discharge from the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). In recognition that the measures must have meaning, not only to clinicians but also to parents and caregivers, longer-term outcomes at 30 …
Annemarie Guerguerian - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
part 6 pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support 2015 international consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations reprint
Pediatrics, 2015Co-Authors: Allan R De Caen, Dianne L Atkins, Monica E Kleinman, Peter A Meaney, Ian Maconochie, Richard Aickin, Dominique Biarent, Annemarie Guerguerian, David Kloeck, Vinay NadkarniAbstract:Reprint: The American Heart Association requests that this document be cited as follows: de Caen AR, Maconochie IK, Aickin R, Atkins DL, Biarent D, Guerguerian AM, Kleinman ME, Kloeck DA, Meaney PA, Nadkarni VM, Ng KC, Nuthall G, Reis AG, Shimizu N, Tibballs J, Veliz Pintos R; on behalf of the Pediatric Basic Life Support and Pediatric Advanced Life Support Chapter Collaborators. Part 6: pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. Circulation . 2015;132(suppl 1):S177–S203. Reprinted with permission of the American Heart Association, Inc., European Resuscitation Council, and International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. This article has been published in Circulation and Resuscitation . ( Circulation. 2015;132[suppl 1]:S177–S203. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000275.) The Pediatric Task Force reviewed all questions submitted by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) member councils in 2010, reviewed all council training materials and resuscitation guidelines and algorithms, and conferred on recent areas of interest and controversy. We identified a few areas where there were key differences in council-specific guidelines based on historical recommendations, such as the A-B-C (Airway, Breathing, Circulation) versus C-A-B (Circulation, Airway, Breathing) sequence of provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), initial back blows versus Abdominal Thrusts for foreign-body airway obstruction, an upper limit for recommended chest compression rate, and initial defibrillation dose for shockable rhythms (2 versus 4 J/kg). We produced a working list of prioritized questions and topics, which was adjusted with the advent of new research evidence. This led to a prioritized palate of 21 PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) questions for ILCOR task force focus. The 2015 process was supported by information specialists who performed in-depth systematic searches, liaising with pediatric content experts so that the most appropriate terms and outcomes and the most relevant publications were identified. …
-
part 6 pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support 2015 international consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations
Circulation, 2015Co-Authors: Allan R De Caen, Dianne L Atkins, Monica E Kleinman, Peter A Meaney, Ian Maconochie, Richard Aickin, Dominique Biarent, Annemarie Guerguerian, David Kloeck, Vinay M NadkarniAbstract:The Pediatric Task Force reviewed all questions submitted by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) member councils in 2010, reviewed all council training materials and resuscitation guidelines and algorithms, and conferred on recent areas of interest and controversy. We identified a few areas where there were key differences in council-specific guidelines based on historical recommendations, such as the A-B-C (Airway, Breathing, Circulation) versus C-A-B (Circulation, Airway, Breathing) sequence of provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), initial back blows versus Abdominal Thrusts for foreign-body airway obstruction, an upper limit for recommended chest compression rate, and initial defibrillation dose for shockable rhythms (2 versus 4 J/kg). We produced a working list of prioritized questions and topics, which was adjusted with the advent of new research evidence. This led to a prioritized palate of 21 PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) questions for ILCOR task force focus. The 2015 process was supported by information specialists who performed in-depth systematic searches, liaising with pediatric content experts so that the most appropriate terms and outcomes and the most relevant publications were identified. Relevant adult literature was considered (extrapolated) in those PICO questions that overlapped with other task forces, or when there were insufficient pediatric data. In rare circumstances (in the absence of sufficient human data), appropriate animal studies were incorporated into reviews of the literature. However, these data were considered only when higher levels of evidence were not available and the topic was deemed critical. When formulating the PICO questions, the task force felt it important to evaluate patient outcomes that extend beyond return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) or discharge from the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). In recognition that the measures must have meaning, not only to clinicians but also to parents and caregivers, longer-term outcomes at 30 …
