Stassen Willem, Chern Yeh Lai, Blewer Audrey L, Kong So Yeon Joyce, Lippert Freddy, Ong Marcus Eng Hock, Zhang Lin, Fu Wah Ho Andrew
Division of Emergency Medicine, University of Cape Town, Observatory, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa
Department of Emergency Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
BMJ Open. 2025 Jan 29;15(1):e090562. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-090562.
Emergency care begins in the community, who are often the first on the scene. Where emergency care systems are nascent or absent, bystanders represent the only prehospital emergency care that victims might receive. It is important to equip bystanders through life-saving skills training (LST). The aim of this study was to describe access to LST for laypersons globally and to determine barriers or facilitators for access to LST globally.
A global cross-sectional, online survey was undertaken with stakeholders involved in LST programmes and policies through purposive, snowball sampling. The invitation for participation was distributed to local, regional and international emergency care and resuscitation organisations and their membership. Data were collected using a custom-designed survey, based on the literature and following pilot testing. Data were analysed descriptively and visualised according to countries and regions. Logistic regression was used to identify variables predictive of LST.
A total of 302 responses from 67 countries were analysed. Majority of responses were from high- or upper-middle income countries (61.2%) compared with low- or lower-middle income countries (38.8%). All respondents from Europe reported reliable access to LST. Of respondents who reported no LST is delivered, the highest proportion of these represented the Eastern Mediterranean (18.2%), Africa (17.1%) and South America (16.9%). The most common barrier to accessing LST were cultural views surrounding LST (69.2%), while the most common facilitator was interpersonal relationships to encourage the uptake of LST (71.9%). Country level of income (adjusted OR (AOR) 4.31 (95% CI 1.62 to 11.45), p<01), urban location (AOR 10.57 (95% CI 3.32 to 33.66), p<0.001) and level of EMS development (OR 5.73 (95% CI 1.47 to 22.30), p=0.01) were predictive of access to LST.
This study highlights considerable inequity in LST access globally. Future work should seek to mitigate barriers and leverage facilitators through participatory and community-oriented approaches to LST.
急诊护理始于社区,社区人员往往是现场的第一批施救者。在急诊护理系统尚不完善或不存在的地方,旁观者是受害者可能获得的唯一院前急救力量。通过救生技能培训(LST)让旁观者具备急救能力非常重要。本研究的目的是描述全球非专业人员获得救生技能培训的情况,并确定全球获得救生技能培训的障碍或促进因素。
通过目的抽样和滚雪球抽样对参与救生技能培训项目和政策的利益相关者进行了一项全球横断面在线调查。参与邀请已分发给地方、区域和国际急诊护理与复苏组织及其成员。基于文献并经过预试验后,使用定制设计的调查问卷收集数据。对数据进行描述性分析,并按国家和地区进行可视化展示。采用逻辑回归来确定预测获得救生技能培训的变量。
共分析了来自67个国家的302份回复。与低收入或中低收入国家(38.8%)相比,大多数回复来自高收入或上中等收入国家(61.2%)。欧洲的所有受访者均表示能够可靠地获得救生技能培训。在报告未开展救生技能培训的受访者中,比例最高的是东地中海地区(18.2%)、非洲(17.1%)和南美洲(16.9%)。获得救生技能培训最常见的障碍是围绕救生技能培训的文化观念(69.2%),而最常见的促进因素是鼓励接受救生技能培训的人际关系(71.9%)。国家收入水平(调整后的比值比(AOR)为4.31(95%置信区间为1.62至11.45),p<0.01)、城市地区(AOR为10.57(95%置信区间为3.32至33.66),p<0.001)和急救医疗服务发展水平(比值比为5.73(95%置信区间为1.47至22.30),p = 0.01)可预测获得救生技能培训的情况。
本研究凸显了全球在获得救生技能培训方面存在的严重不平等现象。未来的工作应通过参与式和以社区为导向的救生技能培训方法,设法减少障碍并利用促进因素。