The awareness of neurological prognostication in comatose CA
patients
97.8% reported awareness of one or more prognostic tools. As shown in
table 2, the details of neurological prognostication were not well
understood. Brain stem reflex, motor response and myoclonus were
considered to be related with prognosis by 63.5%, 44.6% and 31.7%
respondents respectively. Only 30.7% knew that GWR value <1.1
indicated a poor prognosis and only 8.1% know the most commonly used
SSEP N20. Epileptiform, burst suppression, low voltage and isoelectric
was considered to predict poor neurological outcome by 35.0%, 27.4%,
33.3% and 45.7% respondents respectively. 46.7% confirmed the
prognostic value of NSE, and only 24.7% for S-100β.
The optimal timing of neurological prognostication considered by
respondents was shown in figure 2 and figure 3. Nearly 1/4 did not know
the best time point of prognostic tools. As indicated in figure 2,
26.1% respondents considered the best time of clinical evaluation was
within 24h from ROSC, 28.8% between 24h-72h and 19% later than 72h for
non TTM-patients. The corresponding number for TTM-patients was 13.5%,
31.1% and 28.2% respectively. As shown in figure 3, that the optimal
time of EEG, SSEP and NSE for neuroprognosticaion was later than 72h
after ROSC was reported by only 27.6%, 16.2% and 10.5% respondents
respectively.