4.6 Article

Increased bystander intervention when volunteer responders attend out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

期刊

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.1030843

关键词

out-of-hospital cardiac arrest; volunteer responders; bystander interventions; cardiopulmonary resuscitation; defibrillation

资金

  1. Novo Nordisk Foundation
  2. [NNF190C0055142]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to investigate the association between alarm acceptance by volunteer responders, bystander intervention, and survival in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The study found that when volunteer responders accepted the alarm and arrived before EMS, there was a significant increase in bystander CPR and defibrillation. This finding is important for improving the survival of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients.
AimThe primary aim was to investigate the association between alarm acceptance compared to no-acceptance by volunteer responders, bystander intervention, and survival in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Materials and methodsThis retrospective observational study included all suspected out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) with activation of volunteer responders in the Capital Region of Denmark (1 November 2018 to 14 May 2019), the Central Denmark Region (1 November 2018 to 31 December 2020), and the Northern Denmark Region (14 February 2020 to 31 December 2020). All OHCAs unwitnessed by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) were analyzed on the basis on alarm acceptance and arrival before EMS. The primary outcomes were bystander cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR), bystander defibrillation and secondary outcome was 30-day survival. A questionnaire sent to all volunteer responders was used with respect to their arrival status. ResultsWe identified 1,877 OHCAs with volunteer responder activation eligible for inclusion and 1,725 (91.9%) of these had at least one volunteer responder accepting the alarm (accepted). Of these, 1,355 (79%) reported arrival status whereof 883 (65%) arrived before EMS. When volunteer responders accepted the alarm and arrived before EMS, we found increased proportions and adjusted odds ratio for bystander CPR {94 vs. 83%, 4.31 [95% CI (2.43-7.67)] and bystander defibrillation [13 vs. 9%, 3.16 (1.60-6.25)]} compared to cases where no volunteer responders accepted the alarm. ConclusionWe observed a fourfold increased odds ratio for bystander CPR and a threefold increased odds ratio for bystander defibrillation when volunteer responders accepted the alarm and arrived before EMS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据