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.