Dataset Information

Interventions to improve the quality of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Performing high-quality bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) improves the clinical outcomes of victims with sudden cardiac arrest. Thus far, no systematic review has been performed to identify interventions associated with improved bystander CPR quality.

Methods

We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, EBSCO CINAHL, Ovid PsycInfo, Thomson Reuters SCI-EXPANDED, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to retrieve studies published from 1 January 1966 to 5 October 2018 associated with interventions that could improve the quality of bystander CPR. Data regarding participant characteristics, interventions, and design and outcomes of included studies were extracted.

Results

Of the initially identified 2,703 studies, 42 were included. Of these, 32 were randomized controlled trials. Participants included adults, high school students, and university students with non-medical professional majors. Interventions improving bystander CPR quality included telephone dispatcher-assisted CPR (DA-CPR) with simplified or more concrete instructions, compression-only CPR, and other on-scene interventions, such as four-hand CPR for elderly rescuers, kneel on opposite sides for two-person CPR, and CPR with heels for a tired rescuer. Devices providing real-time feedback and mobile devices containing CPR applications or software were also found to be beneficial in improving the quality of bystander CPR. However, using mobile devices for improving CPR quality or for assisting DA-CPR might cause rescuers to delay starting CPR.

Conclusions

To further improve the clinical outcomes of victims with cardiac arrest, these effective interventions may be included in the guidelines for bystander CPR.

SUBMITTER: Chen KY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6373936 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceOutcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) remain poor. Outcomes associated with community interventions that address bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) remain unclear and need further study.ObjectiveTo examine community interventions and their association with bystander CPR and survival after OHCA.Data sourcesLiterature search of the MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases from database inception to December 31, 2018, was conducted. Key search terms included cardiopulmonary resuscitation, layperson, basic life support, education, cardiac arrest, and survival.Study selectionCommunity intervention studies that reported on comparisons with control and differences in survival following OHCA were included. Studies that focused only on in-hospital interventions, patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest, only dispatcher-assisted CPR, or provision of automated external defibrillators were excluded.Data extraction and synthesisPooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were estimated using a random-effects model. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline.Main outcomes and measuresThirty-day survival or survival to hospital discharge and bystander CPR rate.ResultsA total of 4480 articles were identified; of these, 15 studies were included for analysis. There were broadly 2 types of interventions: community intervention alone (5 studies) and community intervention combined with changes in health services (10 studies). Four studies involved notification systems that alerted trained lay bystanders to the location of the OHCA in addition to CPR skills training. Meta-analysis of 9 studies including 21?266 patients with OHCA found that community interventions were associated with increased survival to discharge or 30-day survival (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.14-1.57; I2?=?33%) and greater bystander CPR rate (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.06-1.54; I2?=?82%). Compared with community intervention alone, community plus health service intervention was associated with a greater bystander CPR rate compared with community alone (community plus intervention: OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.26-2.40 vs community alone: OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.85-1.31) (P?=?.01). Survival rate, however, was not significantly different between intervention types: community plus health service intervention OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.09-2.68 vs community only OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.05-1.50 (P?=?.21).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, while the evidence base is limited, community-based interventions with a focus on improving bystander CPR appeared to be associated with improved survival following OHCA. Further evaluations in diverse settings are needed to enable widespread implementation of such interventions.

Project description:BackgroundThere is a higher incidence of cardiac arrest in economically deprived areas; however, data show that bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in those areas is lower. This results in lower survival rates, placing those communities at a double disadvantage. This systematic review explored the barriers and facilitators to engaging with bystander CPR in deprived communities.MethodsStudies were eligible for inclusion if they addressed any barrier or facilitator to performing bystander CPR or being trained in CPR or training others. Studies had to either be set in a deprived area or examine a deprived population. Selected studies were published between January 2000 and December 2017 and reported on primary research. No language limitations were applied. Searches were conducted in the following databases: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science Core Collection. Unpublished 'grey' literature was also searched as well as the reference lists of any relevant studies.ResultsThe systematic review highlighted several main factors acting as barriers or facilitators to engaging with bystander CPR in deprived communities: (1) the willingness to learn or perform CPR, (2) the confidence to perform CPR, and (3) self-reported likelihood of performing CPR. The review also revealed additional barriers to engaging with CPR which are specific to - or more acute for - individuals from socioeconomically deprived backgrounds or areas.DiscussionWe found little evidence suggesting that the willingness to perform or learn bystander CPR is lower in deprived communities compared to the general population. However, the confidence to perform CPR in deprived communities was affected by some measures of socioeconomic status. The results also crucially highlighted other barriers more acute in deprived communities: the risk to personal safety in administering CPR; the fear of legal consequences; and the lack of community cohesion and other cultural barriers.

Project description:BackgroundA key determinant of survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is bystander cardio pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) which can more than double an individual's chances of surviving to discharge from hospital. The experience of other international OHCA survival programmes has shown that increasing bystander CPR is strongly associated with an increase in overall survival. However, existing data suggest that the more economically deprived an area is the higher the incidence of cardiac arrest. At the same time, rates of bystander CPR in the same areas are lower, which could result in lower survival rates. High-profile awareness raising campaigns that are generic focus have not specifically targeted people living in deprived communities who may require more tailored campaigns and interventions to change attitudes and improve confidence to administer bystander CPR. Therefore, this systematic review will explore the facilitators and barriers to engaging with bystander CPR which exist in deprived communities The secondary objective is to identify existing bystander OHCA social marketing and social network intervention campaigns that could inform future activities to improve the rate of bystander CPR in deprived communities.MethodsSystematic review searching the following databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science Core Collection Citation Indexes. Unpublished 'grey' literature will also be sourced through web searches, stakeholder interviews, and an advisory group. The reference lists of any relevant reviews will also be checked for additional studies. References will be restricted to those published in 2000 onwards. Authors will independently screen, assess data quality, and extract data for synthesis. A narrative synthesis of study findings will be conducted, with findings presented thematically.DiscussionThis review will focus on all studies that seek to examine the barriers and facilitators to the delivery of bystander CPR in deprived communities and identify examples of previous interventions or activities that could inform the design of a future theory-based intervention to improve the rate of bystander CPR in deprived communities.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42017081944.

Project description:BackgroundOutbreaks of emerging infectious diseases, such as COVID-19, have negative impacts on bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (BCPR) for fear of transmission while breaking social distancing rules. The latest guidelines recommend hands-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and facemask use. However, public willingness in this setup remains unknown.MethodsA cross-sectional, unrestricted volunteer Internet survey was conducted to assess individuals' attitudes and behaviors toward performing BCPR, pre-existing CPR training, occupational identity, age group, and gender. The raking method for weights and a regression analysis for the predictors of willingness were performed.ResultsAmong 1,347 eligible respondents, 822 (61%) had negative attitudes toward performing BCPR. Healthcare providers (HCPs) and those with pre-existing CPR training had fewer negative attitudes (p < 0.001); HCPs and those with pre-existing CPR training and unchanged attitude showed more positive behaviors toward BCPR (p < 0.001). Further, 9.7% of the respondents would absolutely refuse to perform BCPR. In contrast, 16.9% would perform BCPR directly despite the outbreak. Approximately 9.9% would perform it if they were instructed, 23.5%, if they wore facemasks, and 40.1%, if they were to perform hands-only CPR. Interestingly, among the 822 respondents with negative attitudes, over 85% still tended to perform BCPR in the abovementioned situations. The weighted analysis showed similar results. The adjusted predictors for lower negative attitudes toward BCPR were younger age, being a man, and being an HCP; those for more positive behaviors were younger age and being an HCP.ConclusionsOutbreaks of emerging infectious diseases, such as COVID-19, have negative impacts on attitudes and behaviors toward BCPR. Younger individuals, men, HCPs, and those with pre-existing CPR training tended to show fewer negative attitudes and behaviors. Meanwhile, most individuals with negative attitudes still expressed positive behaviors under safer measures such as facemask protection, hands-only CPR, and available dispatch instructions.

Project description:BackgroundSocial determinants are associated with survival from out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest (SCA). Because prompt delivery of bystander CPR (B-CPR) doubles survival and B-CPR rates are low, we sought to assess whether gender, socioeconomic status (SES), race, and ethnicity are associated with lower rates of B-CPR and CPR training.MethodsThis scoping review was conducted as part of the continuous evidence evaluation process for the 2020 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care as part of the Resuscitation Education Science section. We searched PubMed and excluded citations that were abstracts only, letters or editorials, and pediatric studies.ResultsWe reviewed 762 manuscripts and identified 24 as relevant; 4 explored gender disparities; 12 explored SES; 11 explored race and ethnicity; and 3 had overlapping themes, all of which examined B-CPR or CPR training. Females were less likely to receive B-CPR than males in public locations. Observed gender disparities in B-CPR may be associated with individuals fearing accusations of inappropriate touching or injuring female victims. Studies demonstrated that low-SES neighborhoods were associated with lower rates of B-CPR and CPR training. In the US, predominantly Black and Hispanic neighborhoods were associated with lower rates of B-CPR and CPR training. Language barriers were associated with lack of CPR training.ConclusionGender, SES, race, and ethnicity impact receiving B-CPR and obtaining CPR training. The impact of this is that these populations are less likely to receive B-CPR, which decreases their odds of surviving SCA. These health disparities must be addressed. Our work can inform future research, education, and public health initiatives to promote equity in B-CPR knowledge and provision. As an immediate next step, organizations that develop and deliver CPR curricula to potential bystanders should engage affected communities to determine how best to improve training and delivery of B-CPR.

Project description:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Early bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is one of the most important predictors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) survival. There is a dearth of literature on CPR engagement in countries such as Ghana, where cardiovascular events are increasingly prevalent. In this study, we sought to evaluate Ghanaians' knowledge of and attitudes towards bystander CPR, in the context of the country's nascent emergency medicine network. METHODS:Capitalizing on the growing ubiquity and use of social media across the country, we used a novel social media sampling strategy for this study. We created, pre-tested, and distributed an online survey, using the two most utilized social media platforms in Ghana: WhatsApp and Facebook. An airtime data incentive of 5 US dollars, worth between 5 and 10 GB of cellular data based on mobile phone carrier, was provided as incentive. Inclusion criteria were (1) ? 18 years of age, (2) living in Ghana. Survey participants were encouraged to distribute the survey within their own networks to expand its reach. We stratified participants' responses by healthcare affiliation, and further grouped healthcare workers into ambulance and non-ambulance personnel. We used chi-square (?2)/Fisher's Exact tests to compare differences in responses between the groups. Based on the question "have you ever heard of CPR?", an alpha of 0.05 and a 95% confidence interval, we expected to have 80% power to detect a 15% difference in responses between lay and healthcare providers with an estimated sample size of 246 study participants. RESULTS:The survey was launched on 8 July 2019 and closed approximately 51 h post-launch. With a 64% completion rate and 479 unique survey completions, the study was overpowered at 96% power, to detect differences in responses between the groups. There was geographic representation across all 10 historic regions of Ghana. Over half (57.8%, n = 277) of the respondents were non-medically affiliated, and 71.9% were women. Healthcare workers were more aware of CPR than lay respondents (96.5% vs 68.1%; p < 0.001). Eighty-five percent of respondents were aware that CPR involves chest compressions, and almost 70% indicated that "mouth to mouth" is a necessary component of CPR. Fewer than 10% were unwilling to administer CPR. Lack of skills (44.9%) and fear of causing harm (25.5%) were barriers noted by respondents for not administering CPR. Notably, a quarter of ambulance workers reported never having received CPR training. If they were to witness a collapse, 62.0% would call an ambulance, and 32.6% would hail a taxi. CONCLUSION:The majority of participants are willing to perform CPR. Contextualized training that emphasizes hands-only CPR and builds participants' confidence may increase bystander willingness and engagement.