Riva Gabriel, Jonsson Martin, Ringh Mattias, Claesson Andreas, Djärv Therese, Forsberg Sune, Nordberg Per, Rubertsson Sten, Rawshani Araz, Nord Anette, Hollenberg Jacob
Center for Resuscitation Science, Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Centrum för hjärtstoppsforskning, Södersjukhuset, Sjukhusbacken 10, 118 83 Stockholm, Sweden.
Center for Resuscitation Science, Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Centrum för hjärtstoppsforskning, Södersjukhuset, Sjukhusbacken 10, 118 83 Stockholm, Sweden.
Resuscitation. 2020 Dec;157:195-201. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.08.125. Epub 2020 Sep 10.
Strategies to increase provision of bystander CPR include mass education of laypersons. Additionally, programs directed at emergency dispatchers to provide CPR instructions during emergency calls to untrained bystanders have emerged. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between dispatcher-assisted CPR (DA- CPR) and 30-day survival compared with no CPR or spontaneously initiated CPR by lay bystanders prior to emergency medical services in out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).
Nationwide observational cohort study including all consecutive lay bystander witnessed OHCAs reported to the Swedish Register for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in 2010-2017. Exposure was categorized as: no CPR (NO-CPR), DA-CPR and spontaneously initiated CPR (SP-CPR) prior to EMS arrival. Propensity-score matched cohorts were used for comparison between groups. Main Outcome was 30-day survival.
A total of 15 471 patients were included and distributed as follows: NO-CPR 6440 (41.6%), DA-CPR 4793 (31.0%) and SP-CPR 4238 (27.4%). Survival rates to 30 days were 7.1%, 13.0% and 18.3%, respectively. In propensity-score matched analysis (DA-CPR as reference), NO-CPR was associated with lower survival (conditional OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.52-0.72) and SP-CPR was associated with higher survival (conditional OR 1.21 (95% CI 1.05-1.39).
DA-CPR was associated with a higher survival compared with NO-CPR. However, DA-CPR was associated with a lower survival compared with SP-CPR. These results reinforce the vital role of DA-CPR, although continuous efforts to disseminate CPR training must be considered a top priority if survival after out of hospital cardiac arrest is to continue to increase.
增加旁观者心肺复苏(CPR)实施率的策略包括对普通民众进行大规模教育。此外,针对紧急调度员的项目也已出现,这些项目旨在在紧急呼叫期间为未经培训的旁观者提供心肺复苏指导。本研究的目的是评估与未进行心肺复苏或在院外心脏骤停(OHCA)的紧急医疗服务之前由普通旁观者自发进行心肺复苏相比,调度员辅助心肺复苏(DA-CPR)与30天生存率之间的关联。
全国性观察性队列研究,纳入2010年至2017年向瑞典心肺复苏登记处报告的所有连续的由普通旁观者见证的院外心脏骤停病例。暴露情况分为:紧急医疗服务到达之前未进行心肺复苏(NO-CPR)、调度员辅助心肺复苏(DA-CPR)和自发进行心肺复苏(SP-CPR)。倾向评分匹配队列用于组间比较。主要结局是30天生存率。
共纳入15471例患者,分布如下:NO-CPR组6440例(41.6%),DA-CPR组4793例(31.0%),SP-CPR组4238例(27.4%)。30天生存率分别为7.1%、13.0%和18.3%。在倾向评分匹配分析中(以DA-CPR为参照),NO-CPR与较低的生存率相关(条件OR 0.61,95%CI 0.52-0.72),SP-CPR与较高的生存率相关(条件OR 1.21(95%CI 1.05-1.39)。
与NO-CPR相比,DA-CPR与较高的生存率相关。然而,与SP-CPR相比,DA-CPR与较低的生存率相关。这些结果强化了DA-CPR的重要作用,尽管如果要继续提高院外心脏骤停后的生存率,持续努力推广心肺复苏培训仍必须被视为首要任务。