Skip to main content

Enter your search

Results will be displayed to the left.

20 minute resuscitation for pediatrics

Question# 996

I’m looking for clarification on how the “20‑minute” resuscitation benchmark should be applied in pediatric cardiac arrest, particularly when transport is anticipated and TOR is not being considered.

From reviewing the ALS PCS and the RPPEO medical advisory on on‑scene resuscitation time, my understanding is that the 20‑minute benchmark supports resuscitation prior to TOR and is not a fixed on‑scene requirement when ongoing care and transport are appropriate. At the same time, pediatric evidence highlights a balance between high‑quality on‑scene care and avoiding delays to hospital intervention.

Could you clarify how the 20‑minute benchmark should be interpreted in pediatric patients when transport is planned, and what clinical factors should guide the decision to stay on scene versus initiate earlier transport (e.g., response to initial resuscitation, suspected reversible causes, need for advanced interventions, or proximity to a pediatric‑capable centre)?

Answer:

Thank you for your MedicASK question. You have recognized an important piece regarding the application of the “20‑minute” resuscitation objective in the Medical Cardiac Arrest Medical Directive.

Your interpretation is aligned with the intent of both the ALS PCS and the OBHG Companion Document. The 20‑minute resuscitation objective is best understood as a guideline to support adequate, high‑quality resuscitation prior to considering termination of resuscitation (TOR), rather than a rigid requirement to remain on scene for a fixed duration in all cases.

In pediatric patients where transport is anticipated and TOR is not being considered (as per the ALS PCS), the 20‑minute benchmark should not delay transport when there is a reasonable expectation that continued care or hospital-based interventions may provide benefit. Instead, it should be applied flexibly, with a focus on ensuring that key early resuscitative priorities are addressed before departure whenever feasible.

Key considerations for longer scene time vs. early transport
Decision-making should be guided by the balance between delivering optimal on‑scene care and minimizing delays to definitive interventions. Important factors include:
  1. Response to initial resuscitation
    • Evidence of clinical improvement (e.g., ROSC, improving ETCO₂, organized rhythm) supports continued management tailored to the evolving condition, which may include early transport or may include longer scene time to better stabilize prior to movement.
    • Lack of response does not mandate a full 20‑minute on‑scene resuscitation if other factors favor transport (suspected reversible causes, need for advanced interventions, proximity to higher level of care).
  2. Suspected reversible causes
    • When a potentially reversible etiology is suspected early transport may be prioritized if hospital-based diagnostics or therapies would provide increased chances of patient outcomes and survival.
      • Hypovolemia
      • Hydrogen ion (acidosis)
      • Hyper/Hypokalemia
      • Toxins
      • Tension Pneumothorax
      • Thrombosis (pulmonary & coronary)
      • Tamponade (cardiac)
    • If the reversible cause can be rapidly addressed on scene (e.g., airway optimization, ventilation), a brief period to intervene is appropriate before transport.
  3. Need for advanced or hospital-based interventions
    • Situations requiring interventions not available in the prehospital setting (e.g., advanced imaging, surgical management, medications, advanced airway, specific antidote requirements) support earlier transport.
    • Conversely, when high‑quality CPR and ALS interventions can be effectively delivered on scene without interruption, remaining briefly to optimize these may be beneficial.
  4. Quality and logistics of ongoing resuscitation
    • If high‑quality CPR (including minimal interruptions, effective ventilation, and appropriate rhythm management) can be maintained during transport, earlier transport is reasonable once competing priorities have been addressed
    • If transport is likely to significantly degrade CPR quality or delay critical interventions (e.g., difficult airway management), additional time on scene may be warranted.

Practical interpretation
In practice, the 20‑minute benchmark should be viewed as:

  • A reference point for considering TOR, not a mandatory on‑scene duration
  • Remains flexible throughout resuscitation, when transport is planned
  • Secondary to clinical judgment, emphasizing early high‑quality interventions while also considering timely access to a higher level and definitive care

Summary
For pediatric cardiac arrest with planned transport, crews should prioritize:

  • Immediate high‑quality CPR and correction of reversible causes (if possible)
  • Assessment and response to resuscitative efforts and expected clinical trajectory
  • Early transport when hospital-level care is likely to add value and can be reached without compromising resuscitation quality
  • The intention is to provide some early resuscitation and avoid a "scoop and run" situation unless a clearly reversible cause is identified that cannot be managed on scene. Prior to scene departure vascular access should be placed to administer epinephrine if this is within scope of practice, some means of reliable ventilation should also be established and optimized "CPR choreography" should be underway prior to scene departure.

Published

21 August 2026

ALSPCS Version

5.4

Views

10

Please reference the MOST RECENT ALS PCS for updates and changes to these directives.