Marks Tore, Metelmann Bibiana, Gamberini Lorenzo, Metelmann Camilla, Schnaubelt Sebastian, Semeraro Federico, Hansen Carolina Malta
Department of Anaesthesiology, University Medicine Greifswald, Germany.
Department of Anesthesia, Intensive Care and Prehospital Emergency, Ospedale Maggiore Carlo Alberto Pizzardi, Bologna, Emilia-Romagna, Italy.
Resusc Plus. 2025 May 21;24:100988. doi: 10.1016/j.resplu.2025.100988. eCollection 2025 Jul.
Several countries worldwide have implemented systems to alert community first responders (CFR) via smartphone applications to increase likelihood of survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Substantial heterogeneity across CFR systems has been reported but recent reports are lacking. The European Resuscitation Council (ERC) conducted a survey to characterise and compare CFR systems focusing on requirements for joining CFR programs.
An online survey with 28 questions regarding general system description, CFR qualification and training was conducted using SurveyMonkey between October 2024 and January 2025. The survey was shared via QR-code at the ERC Congress 2024, e-mail invitations to all ERC national resuscitation councils, the ERC Guidelines 2025 webpage, ERC social media, ERC newsletter, and personal e-mail invitations to research groups and CFR systems.
Thirty-five CFR systems from 19 countries participated in the survey. The majority of CFR systems (69%, = 24) require some kind of Basic Life Support (BLS) training as a minimum qualification. In 80% ( = 28) the minimum age for participation is 18 years. App-specific training is offered by 51% ( = 18) and in 11% ( = 4) of CFR systems no dispatch centre is involved in the alert, 43% ( = 15) of systems alert exclusively to OHCA, and 17% ( = 6) of CFR systems only alert CFR to adult OHCAs.
There are multiple CFR systems with a high degree of heterogeneity regarding minimum required CFR qualification and training as well as alerting modalities. Understanding these differences across systems is paramount to design studies to test the effect of CFR on patient outcomes.
全球多个国家已实施通过智能手机应用程序向社区第一响应者(CFR)发出警报的系统,以提高院外心脏骤停(OHCA)后的生存可能性。据报道,CFR系统存在很大的异质性,但最近缺乏相关报告。欧洲复苏委员会(ERC)进行了一项调查,以描述和比较CFR系统,重点关注加入CFR项目的要求。
2024年10月至2025年1月期间,使用SurveyMonkey进行了一项包含28个问题的在线调查,内容涉及一般系统描述、CFR资格和培训。该调查通过二维码在2024年ERC大会上分享,通过电子邮件邀请所有ERC国家复苏委员会,在2025年ERC指南网页、ERC社交媒体、ERC时事通讯上发布,并通过个人电子邮件邀请研究小组和CFR系统。
来自19个国家的35个CFR系统参与了调查。大多数CFR系统(69%,n = 24)要求某种基本生命支持(BLS)培训作为最低资格。80%(n = 28)的系统参与的最低年龄为18岁。51%(n = 18)的系统提供特定应用程序培训,11%(n = 4)的CFR系统在警报中不涉及调度中心,43%(n = 15)的系统仅向OHCA发出警报,17%(n = 6)的CFR系统仅向成年OHCA患者的CFR发出警报。
有多个CFR系统,在所需的最低CFR资格和培训以及警报方式方面存在高度异质性。了解不同系统之间的这些差异对于设计测试CFR对患者结局影响的研究至关重要。