Management of Patients With Cardiac Arrest Requiring Interfacility Transport: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

People who experience out-of-hospital cardiac arrest often require care at a regional center for continued treatment after resuscitation, but many do not initially present to the hospital where they will be admitted. For patients who require interfacility transport after cardiac arrest, the decision to transfer between centers is complex and often based on individual clinical characteristics, resources at the presenting hospital, and available transport resources. Once the decision has been made to transfer a patient after cardiac arrest, there is little direct guidance on how best to provide interfacility transport. Accepting centers depend on transferring emergency departments and emergency medical services professionals to make important and nuanced decisions about postresuscitation care that may determine the efficacy of future treatments. The consequences of early care are greater when transport delays occur, which is common in rural areas or due to inclement weather. Challenges of providing interfacility transfer services for patients who have experienced cardiac arrest include varying expertise of clinicians, differing resources available to them, and nonstandardized communication between transferring and receiving centers. Although many aspects of care are insufficiently studied to determine implications for specific out-of-hospital treatment on outcomes, a general approach of maintaining otherwise recommended postresuscitation care during interfacility transfer is reasonable. This includes close attention to airway, vascular access, ventilator management, sedation, cardiopulmonary monitoring, antiarrhythmic treatments, blood pressure control, temperature control, and metabolic management. Patient stability for transfer, equity and inclusion, and communication also must be considered. Many of these aspects can be delivered by protocol-driven care.

Mechanical versus manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR): an umbrella review of contemporary systematic reviews and more.

BACKGROUND: High-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) can restore spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and neurological function and save lives. We conducted an umbrella review, including previously published systematic reviews (SRs), that compared mechanical and manual CPR; after that, we performed a new SR of the original studies that were not included after the last published SR to provide a panoramic view of the existing evidence on the effectiveness of CPR methods. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline were searched, including English in-hospital (IHCA) and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) SRs, and comparing mechanical versus manual CPR. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) and GRADE were used to assess the quality of included SRs/studies. We included both IHCA and OHCA, which compared mechanical and manual CPR. We analyzed at least one of the outcomes of interest, including ROSC, survival to hospital admission, survival to hospital discharge, 30-day survival, and survival to hospital discharge with good neurological function. Furthermore, subgroup analyses were performed for age, gender, initial rhythm, arrest location, and type of CPR devices. RESULTS: We identified 249 potentially relevant records, of which 238 were excluded. Eleven SRs were analyzed in the Umbrella review (January 2014-March 2022). Furthermore, for a new, additional SR, we identified eight eligible studies (not included in any prior SR) for an in-depth analysis between April 1, 2021, and February 15, 2024. The higher chances of using mechanical CPR for male patients were significantly observed in three studies. Two studies showed that younger patients received more mechanical treatment than older patients. However, studies did not comment on the outcomes based on the patient's gender or age. Most SRs and studies were of low to moderate quality. The pooled findings did not show the superiority of mechanical compared to manual CPR except in a few selected subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Given the significant heterogeneity and methodological limitations of the included studies and SRs, our findings do not provide definitive evidence to support the superiority of mechanical CPR over manual CPR. However, mechanical CPR can serve better where high-quality manual CPR cannot be performed in selected situations.

Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation versus standard treatment for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a Bayesian meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of several randomized trials on extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) in patients with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were examined using frequentist methods, resulting in a dichotomous interpretation of results based on p-values rather than in the probability of clinically relevant treatment effects. To determine such a probability of a clinically relevant ECPR-based treatment effect on neurological outcomes, the authors of these trials performed a Bayesian meta-analysis of the totality of randomized ECPR evidence. METHODS: A systematic search was applied to three electronic databases. Randomized trials that compared ECPR-based treatment with conventional CPR for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were included. The study was preregistered in INPLASY (INPLASY2023120060). The primary Bayesian hierarchical meta-analysis estimated the difference in 6-month neurologically favorable survival in patients with all rhythms, and a secondary analysis assessed this difference in patients with shockable rhythms (Bayesian hierarchical random-effects model). Primary Bayesian analyses were performed under vague priors. Outcomes were formulated as estimated median relative risks, mean absolute risk differences, and numbers needed to treat with corresponding 95% credible intervals (CrIs). The posterior probabilities of various clinically relevant absolute risk difference thresholds were estimated. RESULTS: Three randomized trials were included in the analysis (ECPR, n = 209 patients; conventional CPR, n = 211 patients). The estimated median relative risk of ECPR for 6-month neurologically favorable survival was 1.47 (95%CrI 0.73-3.32) with a mean absolute risk difference of 8.7% (- 5.0; 42.7%) in patients with all rhythms, and the median relative risk was 1.54 (95%CrI 0.79-3.71) with a mean absolute risk difference of 10.8% (95%CrI - 4.2; 73.9%) in patients with shockable rhythms. The posterior probabilities of an absolute risk difference > 0% and > 5% were 91.0% and 71.1% in patients with all rhythms and 92.4% and 75.8% in patients with shockable rhythms, respectively. CONCLUSION: The current Bayesian meta-analysis found a 71.1% and 75.8% posterior probability of a clinically relevant ECPR-based treatment effect on 6-month neurologically favorable survival in patients with all rhythms and shockable rhythms. These results must be interpreted within the context of the reported credible intervals and varying designs of the randomized trials. REGISTRATION: INPLASY (INPLASY2023120060, December 14th, 2023, https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2023.12.0060 ).

Postarrest Care Bundle Improves Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes in the Normothermia Era.

PURPOSE: Temperature targets in patients with cardiac arrest and return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) have changed. Changes to higher temperature targets have been associated with higher breakthrough fevers and mortality. A post-ROSC normothermia bundle was developed to improve compliance with temperature targets. METHODS: In August 2021, "ad hoc" normothermia at the discretion of the attending intensivist was initiated. In December 2021, a post-ROSC normothermia protocol was implemented, incorporating a rigorous, stepwise approach to fever prevention (temperature ≥ 37.8). We conducted a before-after cohort study of all adult patients post-ROSC who survived to intensive care unit admission between August 1, 2021, and April 1, 2022. They were divided into "ad hoc" and "protocol" groups. Clinical outcomes compared included fevers, active cooling, and paralytic use. RESULTS: Fifty-eight post-ROSC patients were admitted; 24 in the "ad hoc" and 34 in the "protocol" groups. Patient demographics were similar between groups. The "ad hoc" group had more shockable rhythms (67% vs 24%, P = .001) and cardiac catheterizations (42% vs 15%, P = .03). The "protocol" group were significantly less likely to have a fever at 40 h (6% vs 40%, P < .001) and 72 h (14% vs 65%, P ≤ .001). Patients in the normothermia "protocol" used significantly less neuromuscular blocking agents (24% vs 50%, P = .05). The normothermia "protocol" resulted in similar mortality (56% vs 58%, P = 1.0). CONCLUSION: Use of a normothermia "protocol" resulted in fewer fevers and less neuromuscular blocker administration compared to "ad hoc" management. A protocolized approach for improved quality of care should be considered in institutions adopting normothermia.

A new method of pulse control in cardiopulmonary resuscitation; Continuous femoral pulse check.

OBJECTIVES: The reliability of manual pulse checks has been questioned but is still recommended in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) guidelines. The aim is to compare the 10-s carotid pulse check (CPC) between heart massage cycles with the continuous femoral pulse check (CoFe PuC) in CPR, and to propose a better location to shorten the interruption times for pulse check. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted on 117 Non-traumatic CPR patients between January 2020 and January 2022. A total of 702 dependent pulse measurements were executed, where carotid and femoral pulses were simultaneously assessed. Cardiac ultrasound, end-tidal CO2, saturation, respiration, and blood pressure were employed for pulse validation. RESULTS: The decision time for determining the presence of a pulse in the last cycle of CPR was 3.03 ± 1.26 s for CoFe PuC, significantly shorter than the 10.31 ± 5.24 s for CPC. CoFe PuC predicted the absence of pulse with 74% sensitivity and 88% specificity, while CPC predicted the absence of pulse with 91% sensitivity and 61% specificity. CONCLUSION: CoFe PuC provides much earlier and more effective information about the pulse than CPC. This shortens the interruption times in CPR. CoFe PuC should be recommended as a new and useful method in CPR guidelines.

Resuscitation on the field of play: a best-practice guideline from Resuscitation Council UK.

Sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) is the leading cause of sudden death in athletes during high-level, organised sport. Patient-related and event-related factors provide an opportunity for rapid intervention and the potential for high survival rates. The aim of this consensus was to develop a best-practice guideline for dedicated field-of-play medical teams responding to SCA during an organised sporting event. A task-and-finish group from Resuscitation Council UK identified a stakeholder group of relevant experts and cardiac arrest survivors in March and April 2022. Together, they developed a best-practice guideline using the best available evidence. A public consultation period further refined the guideline before it was finalised in December 2023. Any sudden collapse, without rapid recovery during sporting activity, should be considered an SCA until proven otherwise. Field-of-play medical teams should be empowered to access the collapsed athlete as soon as possible and perform initial essential interventions in situ. This includes a suggested minimum of three cycles of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation in persistent shockable rhythms while other aspects of advanced life support are initiated. There should be careful organisation and practice of the medical response, including plans to transport athletes to dedicated facilities for definitive medical care. This best-practice guideline complements, rather than supersedes, existing resuscitation guidelines. It provides a clear approach to how to best treat an athlete with SCA and how to organise the medical response so treatments are delivered effectively and optimise outcomes.

A Cluster-Randomized Control Study Comparing a New Cue "Two Compressions per Second" with "100-120 Compressions per Minute" in Training of Bystander Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.

BACKGROUND: Chest compression at a rate of 100-120 compressions per minute (cpm) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is associated with the highest survival rates. Performing compressions at a faster rate may exhaust the rescuers. OBJECTIVES: To compare a new cue of 'two compressions per second' to the traditional cue of '100-120 compressions per minute' on compression rate in CPR training. METHODS: In this cluster-randomized study, students from two senior high schools were assigned into two groups. For the experimental group, the cue for the compression rate was 'two compressions per second'. For the control group, the cue was '100-120 cpm'. Except the different cues, all participants underwent the same standardized CPR training program. Verbal compression rate-related feedback was not obtained during practice. Quality indicators of chest compressions were recorded by a sensorized manikin. The primary outcome measure was mean compression rate at course conclusion. The secondary outcome measures were individual compression quality indicators at course conclusion and 3 months after training. RESULTS: We included 164 participants (85 participants, experimental group; 79 participants, control group). Both groups had similar characteristics. The experimental group had a significantly lower mean compression rate at course conclusion (144.3 ± 16.17 vs. 152.7 ± 18.38 cpm, p = 0.003) and at 3 months after training (p = 0.09). The two groups had similar mean percentage of adequate compression rate (≥ 100 cpm), mean compression depth, and mean percentage of complete recoil at course conclusion and 3 months after training. CONCLUSION: The new cue of 'two compressions per second' resulted in participants having a lower compression rate, although it still exceeded 120 cpm.

A Deep-Learning-Based CPR Action Standardization Method.

In emergency situations, ensuring standardized cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) actions is crucial. However, current automated external defibrillators (AEDs) lack methods to determine whether CPR actions are performed correctly, leading to inconsistent CPR quality. To address this issue, we introduce a novel method called deep-learning-based CPR action standardization (DLCAS). This method involves three parts. First, it detects correct posture using OpenPose to recognize skeletal points. Second, it identifies a marker wristband with our CPR-Detection algorithm and measures compression depth, count, and frequency using a depth algorithm. Finally, we optimize the algorithm for edge devices to enhance real-time processing speed. Extensive experiments on our custom dataset have shown that the CPR-Detection algorithm achieves a mAP0.5 of 97.04%, while reducing parameters to 0.20 M and FLOPs to 132.15 K. In a complete CPR operation procedure, the depth measurement solution achieves an accuracy of 90% with a margin of error less than 1 cm, while the count and frequency measurements achieve 98% accuracy with a margin of error less than two counts. Our method meets the real-time requirements in medical scenarios, and the processing speed on edge devices has increased from 8 fps to 25 fps.

How to Handle In-Flight Death in International Patient Repatriation and Air Ambulance Operations.

In-flight cardiac arrest is a rare event that occurs at a rate of approximately 1 event in 3.8 to 4.7 million commercial airline passengers and at a rate of approximately 1 event in 1,500 to 3,000 patients transported by fixed wing international air medical transport. Only 13% to 19% of victims of in-flight cardiac arrest can be successfully resuscitated. The arrival of an aircraft with a deceased patient/passenger on board triggers a country-specific procedure that focuses on public health and medicolegal considerations. In most jurisdictions, these procedures are detailed in the respective national Aeronautical Information Publication, which are commonly based on the International Civil Aviation Organization International Standards and Recommended Practices, Annex 9 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. Awareness among medical and flight crews on such procedures will support appropriate documentation of the event and enable effective cooperation with the relevant local authorities.

Developing competency of nursing students in cardiopulmonary resuscitation using Resuscitation Quality Improvement technology.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the outcomes of training nursing students in CPR skills using the Resuscitation Quality Improvement (RQI) program. METHODS: Nursing students (n=2,193) in 12 schools across the United States participated in this study. Students performed compressions and bag-masked ventilation on adult and infant manikins using the RQI simulation station without and then with feedback on their performance. RESULTS: With real-time, objective feedback from the RQI simulation station, students' performance of CPR skills improved, and they retained their skills over time. CONCLUSIONS: The RQI program and methodology of feedback is effective for training nursing students to be competent in CPR skills, essential for safe patient care. Nursing and other healthcare professions programs should consider adopting the RQI program for students to develop competency in CPR.

Chest compression quality during CPR of potential contagious patients wearing personal protection equipment.

AIM OF THE STUDY: In this study we aimed to investigate whether changing rescuers wearing N95 masks every 1 min instead of the standard CPR change over time of 2 min would make a difference in effective chest compressions. METHODS: This study was a randomized controlled mannequin study. Participants were selected from healthcare staff. They were divided into two groups of two people in each group. The scenario was implemented on CPR mannequin representing patient with asystolic arrest, that measured compression depth, compression rate, recoil, and correct hand position. Two different scenarios were prepared. In Scenario 1, the rescuers were asked to change chest compression after 1 min. In Scenario 2, standard CPR was applied. The participants' vital parameters, mean compression rate, correct compression rate/ratio, total number of compressions, compression depth, correct recoil/ratio, correct hand position/ratio, mean no-flow time, and total CPR time were recorded. RESULTS: The study hence included 14 teams each for scenarios, with a total of 56 participants. In each scenario, 14 participants were physicians and 14 participants were women. Although there was no difference in the first minute of the cycles starting from the fourth cycle, a statistically significant difference was observed in the second minute in all cycles except the fifth cycle. CONCLUSION: Changing the rescuer every 1 min instead of every 2 min while performing CPR with full PPE may prevent the decrease in compression quality that may occur as the resuscitation time gets longer.

Adult Advanced Life Support: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations for advanced life support includes updates on multiple advanced life support topics addressed with 3 different types of reviews. Topics were prioritized on the basis of both recent interest within the resuscitation community and the amount of new evidence available since any previous review. Systematic reviews addressed higher-priority topics, and included double-sequential defibrillation, intravenous versus intraosseous route for drug administration during cardiac arrest, point-of-care echocardiography for intra-arrest prognostication, cardiac arrest caused by pulmonary embolism, postresuscitation oxygenation and ventilation, prophylactic antibiotics after resuscitation, postresuscitation seizure prophylaxis and treatment, and neuroprognostication. New or updated treatment recommendations on these topics are presented. Scoping reviews were conducted for anticipatory charging and monitoring of physiological parameters during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Topics for which systematic reviews and new Consensuses on Science With Treatment Recommendations were completed since 2015 are also summarized here. All remaining topics reviewed were addressed with evidence updates to identify any new evidence and to help determine which topics should be the highest priority for systematic reviews in the next 1 to 2 years.

Neonatal Life Support: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR) for neonatal life support includes evidence from 7 systematic reviews, 3 scoping reviews, and 12 evidence updates. The Neonatal Life Support Task Force generally determined by consensus the type of evidence evaluation to perform; the topics for the evidence updates followed consultation with International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation member resuscitation councils. The 2020 CoSTRs for neonatal life support are published either as new statements or, if appropriate, reiterations of existing statements when the task force found they remained valid. Evidence review topics of particular interest include the use of suction in the presence of both clear and meconium-stained amniotic fluid, sustained inflations for initiation of positive-pressure ventilation, initial oxygen concentrations for initiation of resuscitation in both preterm and term infants, use of epinephrine (adrenaline) when ventilation and compressions fail to stabilize the newborn infant, appropriate routes of drug delivery during resuscitation, and consideration of when it is appropriate to redirect resuscitation efforts after significant efforts have failed. All sections of the Neonatal Resuscitation Algorithm are addressed, from preparation through to postresuscitation care. This document now forms the basis for ongoing evidence evaluation and reevaluation, which will be triggered as further evidence is published. Over 140 million babies are born annually worldwide (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/births-and-deaths-projected-to-2100). If up to 5% receive positive-pressure ventilation, this evidence evaluation is relevant to more than 7 million newborn infants every year. However, in terms of early care of the newborn infant, some of the topics addressed are relevant to every single baby born.

Adult Basic Life Support: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations on basic life support summarizes evidence evaluations performed for 22 topics that were prioritized by the Basic Life Support Task Force of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. The evidence reviews include 16 systematic reviews, 5 scoping reviews, and 1 evidence update. Per agreement within the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, new or revised treatment recommendations were only made after a systematic review. Systematic reviews were performed for the following topics: dispatch diagnosis of cardiac arrest, use of a firm surface for CPR, sequence for starting CPR (compressions-airway-breaths versus airway-breaths-compressions), CPR before calling for help, duration of CPR cycles, hand position during compressions, rhythm check timing, feedback for CPR quality, alternative techniques, public access automated external defibrillator programs, analysis of rhythm during chest compressions, CPR before defibrillation, removal of foreign-body airway obstruction, resuscitation care for suspected opioid-associated emergencies, drowning, and harm from CPR to victims not in cardiac arrest. The topics that resulted in the most extensive task force discussions included CPR during transport, CPR before calling for help, resuscitation care for suspected opioid-associated emergencies, feedback for CPR quality, and analysis of rhythm during chest compressions. After discussion of the scoping reviews and the evidence update, the task force prioritized several topics for new systematic reviews.

Pediatric Life Support: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR) for pediatric life support is based on the most extensive evidence evaluation ever performed by the Pediatric Life Support Task Force. Three types of evidence evaluation were used in this review: systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and evidence updates. Per agreement with the evidence evaluation recommendations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, only systematic reviews could result in a new or revised treatment recommendation. Systematic reviews performed for this 2020 CoSTR for pediatric life support included the topics of sequencing of airway-breaths-compressions versus compressions-airway-breaths in the delivery of pediatric basic life support, the initial timing and dose intervals for epinephrine administration during resuscitation, and the targets for oxygen and carbon dioxide levels in pediatric patients after return of spontaneous circulation. The most controversial topics included the initial timing and dose intervals of epinephrine administration (new treatment recommendations were made) and the administration of fluid for infants and children with septic shock (this latter topic was evaluated by evidence update). All evidence reviews identified the paucity of pediatric data and the need for more research involving resuscitation of infants and children.

Part 2: Evidence Evaluation and Guidelines Development: 2020 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.

The 2020 American Heart Association (AHA) Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care is based on the extensive evidence evaluation performed in conjunction with the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. The Adult Basic and Advanced Life Support, Pediatric Basic and Advanced Life Support, Neonatal Life Support, Resuscitation Education Science, and Systems of Care Writing Groups drafted, reviewed, and approved recommendations, assigning to each recommendation a Class of Recommendation (ie, strength) and Level of Evidence (ie, quality). The 2020 Guidelines are organized in knowledge chunks that are grouped into discrete modules of information on specific topics or management issues. The 2020 Guidelines underwent blinded peer review by subject matter experts and were also reviewed and approved for publication by the AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee and the AHA Executive Committee. The AHA has rigorous conflict-of-interest policies and procedures to minimize the risk of bias or improper influence during development of the guidelines. Anyone involved in any part of the guideline development process disclosed all commercial relationships and other potential conflicts of interest.

Education, Implementation, and Teams: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.

For this 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations, the Education, Implementation, and Teams Task Force applied the population, intervention, comparator, outcome, study design, time frame format and performed 15 systematic reviews, applying the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidance. Furthermore, 4 scoping reviews and 7 evidence updates assessed any new evidence to determine if a change in any existing treatment recommendation was required. The topics covered included training for the treatment of opioid overdose; basic life support, including automated external defibrillator training; measuring implementation and performance in communities, and cardiac arrest centers; advanced life support training, including team and leadership training and rapid response teams; measuring cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance, feedback devices, and debriefing; and the use of social media to improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation application.

Part 7: Systems of Care: 2020 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.

Survival after cardiac arrest requires an integrated system of people, training, equipment, and organizations working together to achieve a common goal. Part 7 of the 2020 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care focuses on systems of care, with an emphasis on elements that are relevant to a broad range of resuscitation situations. Previous systems of care guidelines have identified a Chain of Survival, beginning with prevention and early identification of cardiac arrest and proceeding through resuscitation to post-cardiac arrest care. This concept is reinforced by the addition of recovery as an important stage in cardiac arrest survival. Debriefing and other quality improvement strategies were previously mentioned and are now emphasized. Specific to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, this Part contains recommendations about community initiatives to promote cardiac arrest recognition, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, public access defibrillation, mobile phone technologies to summon first responders, and an enhanced role for emergency telecommunicators. Germane to in-hospital cardiac arrest are recommendations about the recognition and stabilization of hospital patients at risk for developing cardiac arrest. This Part also includes recommendations about clinical debriefing, transport to specialized cardiac arrest centers, organ donation, and performance measurement across the continuum of resuscitation situations.

Lay-rescuers in drowning incidents: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: Many victims of drowning fatalities are lay-people attempting to rescue another. This review aims to identify the safest techniques and equipment (improved or purpose made) for an untrained bystander to use when attempting a water rescue. METHOD: A sample of 249 papers were included after the bibliographic search, in which 19 were finally selected following PRISMA methodology and 3 peer review proceeding presented at international conferences. A total of 22 documents were added to qualitative synthesis. RESULTS: Geographical location, economic level, physical fitness, or experience may vary the profile of the lay-rescuers and how to safely perform a water rescue. Four lay-rescuers profiles were identified: 1) Children rescuing children in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), 2) Adults rescuing adults or children, 3) Lay-people with some experience and rescue training, 4) Lay-people with cultural or professional motivations. Three types of techniques used by those lay-rescuers profiles: a) non-contact techniques for rescues from land: throw and reach, b) non-contact techniques for rescue using a flotation device and, c) contact techniques for rescue into the water: swim and tow with or without fins. CONCLUSION: The expert recommendation of the safest technique for a lay-rescuer is to attempt rescue using a pole, rope, or flotation equipment without entering the water. However, despite the recommendations of non-contact rescues from land, there is a global tendency to attempt contact rescues in the water, despite a lack of evidence on which technique, procedure or equipment contributes to a safer rescue. Training strategies for lay-people should be considered.

Physical activity and quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A secondary analysis of the MANI-CPR trial.

INTRODUCTION: The association between the level of physical activity and quality of cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed by laypeople is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the associations between physical activity level and laypeople performance during an eight-minute scenario of CPR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of the MANI-CPR Trial. The entire cohort of participants was grouped based on the level of physical activity assessed using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) into a "low-moderate" level group and a "high" level group. Descriptive statistics were used for unadjusted analysis and multivariate logistic and linear regression models were also performed. RESULTS: A total of 492 participants who reached the score of "Advanced CPR performer" at the 1-min final test monitored by Laerdal Resusci Anne QCPR were included in this analysis; 224 with a low-moderate level and 268 with a high level of physical activity. A statistically significant difference was found for the outcome of percentage of compressions with adequate depth (low-moderate group: 87.8% [41·4%-99·3%], high group: 97% [63·2%-100%]; P = 0·003). No associations remained significant after controlling for biometric characteristics of the participants, compression protocols and sex. CONCLUSION: Adequate quality CPR may not need high baseline level of physical activity to be performed by a lay rescuer.