Category: News

Intervention by members of the public during an out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHAC) including resuscitation attempts and accessible automated external defibrillator (AED) has been shown to improve survival. This study aimed to investigate the OHCA and AED knowledge and confidence, and barriers to intervention, of the public of North East England, UK. This study used a face-to-face cross-sectional survey on a public high street in Newcastle, UK. Participants were asked unprompted to explain what they would do when faced with an OHCA collapse. Chi-Square analysis was used to test the association of the independent variables sex and first aid trained on the participants’ responses. Of the 421 participants recruited to our study, 82.9% (n = 349) reported that they would know what to do during an OHCA collapse. The most frequent OHCA action mentioned was call 999 (64.1%, n = 270/421) and 58.2% (n = 245/421) of participants reported that they would commence CPR. However, only 14.3% (n = 60/421) of participants spontaneously mentioned that they would locate an AED, while only 4.5% (n = 19/421) recounted that they would apply the AED. Just over half of participants (50.8%, n = 214/421) were first aid trained, with statistically more females (57.3%, n = 126/220) than males (43.9%, n = 87/198) being first aiders (p = 0.01 χ² = 7.41). Most participants (80.3%, n = 338/421) knew what an AED was, and 34.7% (n = 326/421) reported that they knew how to use one, however, only 11.9% (n = 50/421) mentioned that they would actually shock a patient. Being first aid trained increased the likelihood of freely recounting actions for OHCA and AED intervention. The most common barrier to helping during an OHCA was lack of knowledge (29.9%, n = 126/421). Although most participants reported they would know what to do during an OHCA and had knowledge of an AED, low numbers of participants spontaneously mentioned specific OHCA and AED actions. Improving public knowledge would help improve the public’s confidence of intervening during an OHCA and may improve OHCA survival.

Background: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a serious threat to human life and health, characterized by high morbidity and mortality. However, given the limitations of the current emergency medical system (EMS), it is difficult to immediately treat patients who experience OHCA. It is well known that rapid defibrillation after cardiac arrest is essential for improving the survival rate of OHCA, yet automated external defibrillators (AED) are difficult to obtain in a timely manner.

Objective: This review illustrates the feasibility and advantages of AED delivery by drones by surveying current studies on drones, explains that drones are a new strategy in OHCA, and finally proposes novel strategies to address existing problems with drone systems.

Results: The continuous development of drone technology has been beneficial for patients who experience OHCA, as drones have demonstrated powerful capabilities to provide rapid delivery of AED. Drones have great advantages over traditional EMS, and the delivery of AED by drones for patients with OHCA is a new strategy. However, the application of this new strategy in real life still has many challenges.

Conclusion: Drones are promising and innovative tools. Many studies have demonstrated that AED delivery by drones is feasible and cost-effective; however, as a new strategy to improve the survival rate of OHCA patients, there remain problems to be solved. In the future, more in-depth investigations need to be conducted.

Aims: To investigate the association between the arrival of smartphone-activated volunteer responders before the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and bystander defibrillation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) at home and public locations.

Methods and results: This is a retrospective study (1 September 2017-14 May 2019) from the Stockholm Region of Sweden and the Capital Region of Denmark. We included 1271 OHCAs, of which 1029 (81.0%) occurred in private homes and 242 (19.0%) in public locations. The main outcome was bystander defibrillation. At least one volunteer responder arrived before EMS in 381 (37.0%) of OHCAs at home and 84 (34.7%) in public. More patients received bystander defibrillation when a volunteer responder arrived before EMS at home (15.5 vs. 2.2%, P < 0.001) and in public locations (32.1 vs. 19.6%, P = 0.030). Similar results were found among the 361 patients with an initial shockable heart rhythm (52.7 vs. 11.5%, P < 0.001 at home and 60.0 vs. 37.8%, P = 0.025 in public). The standardized probability of receiving bystander defibrillation increased with longer EMS response times in private homes. The 30-day survival was not significantly higher when volunteer responders arrived before EMS (9.2 vs. 7.7% in private homes, P = 0.41; and 40.5 vs. 35.4% in public locations, P = 0.44).

Conclusion: Bystander defibrillation was significantly more common in private homes and public locations when a volunteer responder arrived before the EMS. The standardized probability of bystander defibrillation increased with longer EMS response times in private homes. Our findings support the activation of volunteer responders and suggest that volunteer responders could increase bystander defibrillation, particularly in private homes.

Sudden cardiac arrest remains a relevant problem with a significant number of deaths worldwide. Although survival rates have more than tripled over the last 20 years (4% in 2001 vs. 14% in 2020), survival rates with good neurological outcomes remain persistently low, representing a major socioeconomic problem. Every minute of delay from patient collapse to start cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and early defibrillation reduces the chance of survival by approximately 10-12%. Therefore, the time to treatment is a crucial factor in the prognosis of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Research teams working in the pre-hospital setting are therefore looking for ways to improve the transmission of information from the site of an emergency event and to make it easier for emergency medical dispatch centres (EMDC) to recognise life-threatening conditions with minimal deviation. For emergency unit procedures already at the scene of the event, methods are being sought to efficiently and temporarily replace a non-functioning cardiopulmonary system. In the case of traumatic cardiac arrest (TCA), the focus is mainly on effective affecting non-compressible haemorrhage.

Sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) in patients with epilepsy, particularly those with vagus nerve stimulators (VNS), is rare but clinically significant. We report the case of a 36-year-old woman with known epilepsy and a VNS implant who suffered an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) following a witnessed tonic-clonic seizure. Emergency services identified ventricular fibrillation (VF), and successful defibrillation led to the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Initial investigations, including imaging and laboratory studies, were unremarkable. A multidisciplinary evaluation involving neurology and cardiology was undertaken to explore potential seizure-related cardiac mechanisms and the possible role of the VNS device. This case highlights the complex interplay between epilepsy, autonomic dysfunction, and arrhythmia, emphasising the importance of integrated care and further research into neurocardiac interactions in patients with epilepsy.

Aim: To investigate the relationship between the implementation of real-time audiovisual cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) feedback devices with cardiac arrest patient outcomes, such as return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), short-term survival, and neurological outcome.

Methods: They systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane CENTRAL from inception date until April 30, 2020, for eligible randomized and nonrandomized studies. Pooled odds ratio (OR) for each binary outcome was calculated using R system. The primary patient outcome was ROSC. The secondary outcomes were short-term survival and favorable neurological outcomes (cerebral performance category scores: 1 or 2).

Results: They identified 11 studies (8 nonrandomized and 3 randomized studies) including 4851 patients. Seven studies documented patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and four studies documented patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest. The pooled results did not confirm the effectiveness of CPR feedback device, possibly because of the high heterogeneity in ROSC (OR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.03-1.94, I²: 80%, tau²: 0.1875, heterogeneity test p < 0.01) and survival-to-discharge (OR: 1.27, 95% CI: 0.74-2.18, I²: 86%, tau²: 0.4048, heterogeneity test p < 0.01). The subgroup analysis results revealed that heterogeneity was due to the types of devices used. Patient outcomes were more favorable in studies investigating portable devices than in studies investigating automated external defibrillator (AED)-associated devices.

Conclusions: Whether real-time CPR feedback devices can improve patient outcomes (ROSC and short-term survival) depend on the type of device used. Portable devices led to better outcomes than did AED-associated devices. Future studies comparing different types of devices are required to reach robust conclusion.

Background: The use of public-access automated external defibrillators (AEDs) has become common in Japan. To provide a strategy for appropriate public-access AED deployment, we assessed public-access defibrillation (PAD) by laypersons and the outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) among adult patients by location of arrest.

Methods: From a nationwide, prospective, population-based registry of patients after OHCA in Japan, we enrolled adult patients with bystander-witnessed OHCA of medical origin in public locations between 2013 and 2015. The primary outcome measure was one-month favorable neurological outcome defined by cerebral performance category 1 or 2. Factors associated with favorable neurological outcome after ventricular fibrillation (VF) were assessed by multivariable logistic regression analysis.

Results: A total of 20,970 adult bystander-witnessed OHCAs of medical origin occurred in public locations. Of those, the proportions of PAD by location were: 13.1% (757/5761) in public areas, 15.9% (333/2089) at workplaces, 26.0% (544/2095) in recreation/sports areas, 36.1% (112/310) in educational institutions, and 5.8% (241/4151) on streets/highways. In a multivariable analysis of VF arrests, both bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation [adjusted odds ratio (AOR), 1.78; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.54-2.07] and PAD (AOR, 2.33; 95% CI, 2.05-2.66), and emergency medical service (EMS) response time (AOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.87-0.90) were associated with improved outcomes. Earlier PAD initiated by bystanders before EMS arrival was also associated with better outcomes after OHCA.

Conclusions: In Japan, where public-access AEDs are well-disseminated, the PAD program worked effectively for adult OHCA of medical origin occurring in public locations. Notably, the proportions of PAD differed substantially according to specific public locations.

Background: Although one-half of all public out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) occur outside private homes in residential neighborhoods, their characteristics and outcomes remain unexplored.

Objectives: The authors assessed interventions before ambulance arrival and survival for public OHCA patients in residential neighborhoods.

Methods: Public OHCAs from Vienna (2018-2021) and Copenhagen (2016-2020) were designated residential neighborhoods or nonresidential areas. Interventions (cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR], automated external defibrillator [AED] attached, and defibrillation) and 30-day survival were compared using a generalized estimation equation model adjusted for age and time of day and presented as ORs.

Results: We included 1,052 and 654 public OHCAs from Vienna and Copenhagen, respectively, and 68% and 55% occurred in residential neighborhoods, respectively. The likelihood of CPR, defibrillation, and survival in residential neighborhoods vs nonresidential areas (reference) were as follows: CPR Vienna, 73% vs 78%, OR: 0.78 (95% CI: 0.57-1.06), CPR Copenhagen, 83% vs 90%, OR: 0.54 (95% CI: 0.34-0.88), and CPR combined, 76% vs 84%, OR: 0.70 (95% CI: 0.53-0.90); AED attached Vienna, 36% vs 44%, OR: 0.69 (95% CI: 0.53-0.90), AED attached Copenhagen, 21% vs 43%, OR: 0.33 (95% CI: 0.24-0.48), and AED attached combined, 31% vs 44%, OR: 0.53 (95% CI: 0.42-0.65); defibrillation Vienna, 14% vs 20%, OR: 0.61 (95% CI: 0.43-0.87), defibrillation Copenhagen, 16% vs 36%, OR: 0.35 (95% CI: 0.24-0.51), and defibrillation combined, 15% vs 27%, OR: 0.46 (95% CI: 0.36-0.61); and 30-day survival rate Vienna, 21% vs 26%, OR: 0.84 (95% CI: 0.58-1.20), 30-day survival rate Copenhagen, 33% vs 44%, OR: 0.65 (95% CI: 0.47-0.90), and 30-day survival rate combined, 25% vs 36%, OR: 0.73 (95% CI: 0.58-0.93).

Conclusions: Two-thirds of public OHCAs occurred in residential neighborhoods with fewer resuscitative efforts before ambulance arrival and lower survival than in nonresidential areas. Targeted efforts to improve early CPR and defibrillation for public OHCA patients in residential neighborhoods are needed.

There are 350,000 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) cases annually in the United States of America. Using automated external defibrillators (AEDs) has increased survival in cardiac arrests (CA) with an initial shockable rhythm. Thus, guidelines recommend complete geographical coverage with AEDs. To fill in the gaps in Minnesota, the Center for Resuscitation Medicine at the University of Minnesota raised an $18.8 million grant from the Helmsley Charitable Trust to supply law enforcement first responders with AEDs and, thus, increase survival rates after OHCA by reducing the time to first shock. This report elaborates on the decision-making, fundraising, and logistic strategy required to reach statewide AED coverage.

Methods: The baseline need for AEDs was analyzed using a questionnaire sent out to state law enforcement agencies, state patrols, city and county agencies, and tribal agencies in 2021. Furthermore, OHCA cases of 2021 were reviewed. The combination of this information led to an action plan to equip and train all agencies throughout the state’s eight regions with AEDs.

Results: The electronic survey was initially sent out to 358 agencies. The initial response rate was 77% (n = 276). This resulted in a total need of 8300 AEDs to be deployed over three years (2022-2025). As of 2023, over 4769 AEDs have been distributed, covering 237 sites.

Conclusion: By equipping first responders with AED systems, the Center for Resuscitation Medicine aims to shorten the gap in statewide AED coverage, thus increasing the chances of survival after OHCA.

Background: Volunteer responder (VR) programs for activation of laypersons in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) have been deployed worldwide, but the optimal number of VRs to dispatch is unknown.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between the number of VRs arriving before Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and the proportion of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and defibrillation.

Methods: We included OHCAs not witnessed by EMS with VR activation from the Capital Region (September 2, 2017, to May 14, 2019) and the Central Region of Denmark (November 5, 2018, to December 31, 2019). We created 4 groups according to the number of VRs arriving before EMS: 0, 1, 2, and 3 or more. Using a logistic regression model adjusted for EMS response time, we examined associations between the number of VRs arriving before EMS and bystander CPR and defibrillation.

Results: We included 906 OHCAs. The adjusted ORs for bystander CPR were 2.40 (95% CI: 1.42-4.05), 3.18 (95% CI: 1.39-7.26), and 2.70 (95% CI: 1.32-5.52) when 1, 2, or 3 or more VRs arrived before EMS (reference), respectively. The adjusted OR for bystander defibrillation increased when 1 (1.97 [95% CI: 1.12-3.52]), 2 (2.88 [95% CI: 1.48-5.58]), or 3 or more (3.85 [95% CI: 2.11-7.01]) VRs arrived before EMS (reference). The adjusted OR of bystander defibrillation increased to 1.95 (95% CI: 1.18-3.22) when ≥3 VRs arrived first compared with 1 VR arriving first (reference).

Conclusions: We found an association of increased bystander CPR and defibrillation when 1 or more VRs arrived before the EMS with a trend toward increased bystander defibrillation with increasing number of VRs arriving first.