Munot Sonali, Rugel Emily J, Von Huben Amy, Marschner Simone, Redfern Julie, Ware Sandra, Chow Clara K
Westmead Applied Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.
Resusc Plus. 2022 Feb 6;9:100205. doi: 10.1016/j.resplu.2022.100205. eCollection 2022 Mar.
BACKGROUND & AIM: Bystander response to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) may relate to area-level factors, including socioeconomic status (SES). We aimed to examine whether OHCA among individuals in more disadvantaged areas are less likely to receive bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) compared to those in more advantaged areas.
We analysed data on OHCAs in New South Wales, Australia collected prospectively through a statewide, population-based register. We excluded non-medical arrests; arrests witnessed by a paramedic; occurring in a medical centre, nursing home, police station; or airport, and among individuals with a Do-Not-Resuscitate order. Area-level SES for each arrest was defined using the Australian Bureau of Statistics' Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage and its relationship to likelihood of receiving bystander CPR was examined using hierarchical logistic regression models.
Overall, 39% (6622/16,914) of arrests received bystander CPR (71% of bystander-witnessed). The OHCA burden in disadvantaged areas was higher (age-standardised incidence 76-87/100,000/year in more disadvantaged quintiles 1-4 versus 52 per 100,000/year in most advantaged quintile 5). Bystander CPR rates were lower (38%) in the most disadvantaged quintile and highest (42%) in the most advantaged SES quintile. In adjusted models, younger age, being bystander-witnessed, arresting in a public location, and urban location were all associated with greater likelihood of receiving bystander CPR; however, the association between area-level SES and bystander CPR rate was not significant.
There are lower rates of bystander CPR in less advantaged areas, however after accounting for patient and location characteristics, area-level SES was not associated with bystander CPR. Concerted efforts to engage with communities to improve bystander CPR in novel ways could improve OHCA outcomes.
院外心脏骤停(OHCA)时旁观者的反应可能与区域层面的因素有关,包括社会经济地位(SES)。我们旨在研究与生活在较发达地区的个体相比,处于较贫困地区的个体发生OHCA时接受旁观者心肺复苏(CPR)的可能性是否更低。
我们分析了通过澳大利亚新南威尔士州基于人群的全州登记系统前瞻性收集的OHCA数据。我们排除了非医疗性心脏骤停;护理人员目击的心脏骤停;发生在医疗中心、养老院、警察局或机场的心脏骤停,以及有“不要复苏”医嘱的个体的心脏骤停。每次心脏骤停的区域层面SES使用澳大利亚统计局的相对社会经济劣势指数进行定义,并使用分层逻辑回归模型研究其与接受旁观者CPR可能性的关系。
总体而言,39%(6622/16914)的心脏骤停接受了旁观者CPR(旁观者目击的心脏骤停中有71%接受了CPR)。贫困地区的OHCA负担更高(年龄标准化发病率在最贫困的第1 - 4五分位数中为每年76 - 87/10万,而在最发达的第5五分位数中为每年52/10万)。旁观者CPR率在最贫困的五分位数中最低(38%),在最发达的SES五分位数中最高(42%)。在调整后的模型中,年龄较小、有旁观者目击、在公共场所发生心脏骤停以及在城市地区发生心脏骤停均与接受旁观者CPR的可能性更大相关;然而,区域层面SES与旁观者CPR率之间的关联并不显著。
较贫困地区的旁观者CPR率较低,然而在考虑患者和地点特征后,区域层面SES与旁观者CPR无关。以新的方式与社区共同努力以改善旁观者CPR可能会改善OHCA的结局。