2022 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Pediatric Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; and First Aid Task Forces.

This is the sixth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. This summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation Task Force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews include cardiopulmonary resuscitation during transport; approach to resuscitation after drowning; passive ventilation; minimizing pauses during cardiopulmonary resuscitation; temperature management after cardiac arrest; use of diagnostic point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest; use of vasopressin and corticosteroids during cardiac arrest; coronary angiography after cardiac arrest; public-access defibrillation devices for children; pediatric early warning systems; maintaining normal temperature immediately after birth; suctioning of amniotic fluid at birth; tactile stimulation for resuscitation immediately after birth; use of continuous positive airway pressure for respiratory distress at term birth; respiratory and heart rate monitoring in the delivery room; supraglottic airway use in neonates; prearrest prediction of in-hospital cardiac arrest mortality; basic life support training for likely rescuers of high-risk populations; effect of resuscitation team training; blended learning for life support training; training and recertification for resuscitation instructors; and recovery position for maintenance of breathing and prevention of cardiac arrest. Members from 6 task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria and generated consensus treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in the Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections, and priority knowledge gaps for future research are listed.

2021 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; First Aid Task Forces; and the COVID-19 Working Group.

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation initiated a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed published cardiopulmonary resuscitation science. This is the fifth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations; a more comprehensive review was done in 2020. This latest summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews in this summary include resuscitation topics of video-based dispatch systems; head-up cardiopulmonary resuscitation; early coronary angiography after return of spontaneous circulation; cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the prone patient; cord management at birth for preterm and term infants; devices for administering positive-pressure ventilation at birth; family presence during neonatal resuscitation; self-directed, digitally based basic life support education and training in adults and children; coronavirus disease 2019 infection risk to rescuers from patients in cardiac arrest; and first aid topics, including cooling with water for thermal burns, oral rehydration for exertional dehydration, pediatric tourniquet use, and methods of tick removal. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence, according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations or good practice statements. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections. In addition, the task forces listed priority knowledge gaps for further research.

2020 International Consensus on First Aid Science With Treatment Recommendations.

This is the summary publication of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation's 2020 International Consensus on First Aid Science With Treatment Recommendations. It addresses the most recent published evidence reviewed by the First Aid Task Force science experts. This summary addresses the topics of first aid methods of glucose administration for hypoglycemia; techniques for cooling of exertional hyperthermia and heatstroke; recognition of acute stroke; the use of supplementary oxygen in acute stroke; early or first aid use of aspirin for chest pain; control of life-threatening bleeding through the use of tourniquets, hemostatic dressings, direct pressure, or pressure devices; the use of a compression wrap for closed extremity joint injuries; and temporary storage of an avulsed tooth. Additional summaries of scoping reviews are presented for the use of a recovery position, recognition of a concussion, and 6 other first aid topics. The First Aid Task Force has assessed, discussed, and debated the certainty of evidence on the basis of Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria and present their consensus treatment recommendations with evidence-to-decision highlights and identified priority knowledge gaps for future research.

Control of Severe, Life-Threatening External Bleeding in the Out-of-Hospital Setting: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Trauma, with resultant bleeding, is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality throughout the world; however, the best possible method of bleeding control by immediate responders is unknown. We performed a systematic review of the effectiveness of treatment modalities for severe, life-threatening external bleeding in the out-of-hospital first aid setting. Methods: We followed the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions methodology and report results according to PRISMA guidelines. We included randomized controlled trials, non-randomized comparative studies and case series investigating adults and children with severe, life-threatening external bleeding who were treated with therapies potentially suitable for first aid providers. We assessed the certainty of the evidence and risk of bias. Outcomes were prioritized by first aid specialists based on importance for patients and decision-makers and included mortality due to bleeding, all-cause mortality, cessation of bleeding, time to cessation of bleeding, a decrease in bleeding, and complications/adverse effects. Results were reported in Evidence Profiles. Results: Of the 1,051 full-text articles screened, 107 were included for analysis including 22,798 patients. The primary methods of bleeding control were tourniquets (n = 49), hemostatic dressings (n = 34), hemostatic devices (n = 14), pressure dressings/bandages/devices (n = 8), pressure points (n = 4), including 2 studies that reported multiple hemorrhage control methods. Overall, certainty of evidence was very low and often relied on indirect evidence and poorly controlled studies. Tourniquets were associated with a decrease in mortality when compared with direct manual pressure. Hemostatic dressings resulted in a shorter time to hemostasis than direct manual pressure using standard dressings. Direct manual compression resulted in a shorter time to hemostasis than pressure dressings/devices. Conclusion: Overall, data regarding the control of life-threatening bleeding is of very low certainty, making it difficult to draw robust conclusions for treatment by immediate responders. While more robust data is needed on first aid treatments of life-threatening bleeding, this systematic review aggregates the most comprehensive to date to help guide recommendations. Key words: bleeding; hemorrhage; tourniquet; hemostatic dressing; direct pressure.

2019 American Heart Association and American Red Cross Focused Update for First Aid: Presyncope: An Update to the American Heart Association and American Red Cross Guidelines for First Aid.

This 2019 focused update to the American Heart Association and American Red Cross first aid guidelines follows the completion of a systematic review of treatments for presyncope of vasovagal or orthostatic origin. This review was commissioned by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation and resulted in the development of an international summary statement of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation First Aid Task Force Consensus on Science With Treatment Recommendations. This focused update highlights the evidence supporting specific interventions for presyncope of orthostatic or vasovagal origin and recommends the use of physical counterpressure maneuvers. These maneuvers include the contraction of muscles of the body such as the legs, arms, abdomen, or neck, with the goal of elevating blood pressure and alleviating symptoms. Although lower-body counterpressure maneuvers are favored over upper-body counterpressure maneuvers, multiple methods can be beneficial, depending on the situation.

2019 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Pediatric Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; and First Aid Task Forces.

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation has initiated a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed, published cardiopulmonary resuscitation science. This is the third annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. It addresses the most recent published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation Task Force science experts. This summary addresses the role of cardiac arrest centers and dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation, the role of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults and children, vasopressors in adults, advanced airway interventions in adults and children, targeted temperature management in children after cardiac arrest, initial oxygen concentration during resuscitation of newborns, and interventions for presyncope by first aid providers. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the certainty of the evidence on the basis of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in the Justification and Evidence to Decision Framework Highlights sections. The task forces also listed priority knowledge gaps for further research.

Immediate Interventions for Presyncope of Vasovagal or Orthostatic Origin: A Systematic Review.

Background: Syncope is a common condition that may be prevented. There are non-pharmacological interventions that may be of benefit during the acute episode preceding syncope (presyncope), including physical counter-pressure maneuvers (PCM) or change of body position. We performed a systematic review of interventions that may be applied during presyncope as an immediate, first aid tactic. Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, and CINAHL and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methods, and risk of bias assessments to determine the certainty of the evidence. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized studies, and case series investigating adults and children with signs and symptoms of presyncope of suspected vasovagal or orthostatic origin who applied any intervention that could be used as an immediate, first aid intervention. We examined the following outcomes: prevention of syncope, adverse events, symptom improvement, and vital signs. We conducted a sub-group analysis based on the etiology of vasovagal or orthostatic presyncope. Results: We screened 5,160 titles and abstracts followed by 81 full text articles. We identified 8 studies meeting inclusion criteria, including 2 RCTs and 6 observational studies. All studies used PCM in adults and all were judged to be of low and very low certainty of evidence. For prevention of syncope, one RCT demonstrated benefit with the use of PCM (RR = 1.80 [1.26-1.89]), while observational studies failed to show benefit (RR = 1.31 [0.98 - 1.75]). Two RCTs showed benefit in symptom improvement (RR = 6.00 [2.21 - 8.61] and (RR = 1.57 [1.06 - 1.93]). Blood pressure (BP) improved with the use of PCM: systolic BP mean difference (MD) 21 mmHg higher (95% CI: 18.25 to 23.41 BPM) and diastolic BP MD 11 mmHg higher (95% CI: 9.39 to 13.10 mmHg higher). No adverse events were reported. Conclusion: While there is a minimal amount of evidence available and the findings were mixed, PCM may provide benefit for prevention of syncope during acute episodes of presyncope and may be tried in the first aid setting. No evidence was found for other non-pharmacologic interventions or for the use of PCM in children.

Storage of an avulsed tooth prior to replantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND/AIM: It is crucial to store an avulsed tooth appropriately to preserve the viability of the periodontal ligament cells prior to replantation. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the best available evidence for the effectiveness of any technique available to laypeople for storing an avulsed tooth compared with storage in milk or saliva. METHODS: The following databases were searched (September 2019): Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and Embase. Two reviewers independently considered trial eligibility, then extracted and analyzed data, and assessed the risk of bias. The certainty of the body of evidence was appraised according to the GRADE methodology. RESULTS: Out of 4118 references, 33 studies were included and reported 23 comparisons of which 10 were synthesized in a meta-analysis. The limited evidence available favors storing an avulsed tooth in Hank's balanced salt solution (pooled SMD 2.47, 95% CI [1.59;3.34], P < .00001), propolis solution (pooled SMD 1.73, 95% CI [1.12;2.33], P < .00001), oral rehydration salts (pooled SMD 4.16, 95% CI [2.10;6.23], P < .0001), rice water, and cling film compared with storage in milk. The cell viability rate was significantly lower in teeth stored in saline solutions (pooled SMD -4.35, 95% CI [-7.55;-1.14], P = .008), tap water, buttermilk, castor oil, GC Tooth Mousse, and turmeric extract than those stored in milk. There is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against temporary storage of an avulsed tooth in saliva compared with alternative solutions. The certainty of evidence was considered low to very low due to limitations in study design, indirect study populations and outcome measures, and imprecision. CONCLUSION: Although milk was shown to extend the periodontal ligament cell viability before replantation compared with saline or tap water, the following media have also demonstrated efficacy at preserving the cell viability: Hank's balanced salt solution, propolis, oral rehydration salts, rice water, and cling film.

ILCOR Scientific Knowledge Gaps and Clinical Research Priorities for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care: A Consensus Statement.

Despite significant advances in the field of resuscitation science, important knowledge gaps persist. Current guidelines for resuscitation are based on the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations, which includes treatment recommendations supported by the available evidence. The writing group developed this consensus statement with the goal of focusing future research by addressing the knowledge gaps identified during and after the 2015 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation evidence evaluation process. Key publications since the 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations are referenced, along with known ongoing clinical trials that are likely to affect future guidelines.

First aid glucose administration routes for symptomatic hypoglycaemia.

BACKGROUND: Hypoglycaemia is a common occurrence in people with diabetes but can also result from an imbalance in glucose homeostasis in the absence of diabetes. The best enteral route for glucose administration for suspected hypoglycaemia in a first aid situation is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of first aid glucose administration by any route appropriate for use by first-aid providers (buccal, sublingual, oral, rectal) for symptomatic hypoglycaemia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL as well as grey literature (records identified in the WHO ICTRP Search Portal, ClinicalTrials.gov and the EU Clinical Trials Register) up to July 2018. We searched reference lists of included studies retrieved by the above searches. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies involving adults and children with documented or suspected hypoglycaemia as well as healthy volunteers, in which glucose was administered by any enteral route appropriate for use by first-aid providers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias, extracted data and evaluated trials for overall certainty of the evidence using the GRADE instrument. We used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool to assess the risk of bias in the randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and the 'risk of bias In non-randomised studies of interventions' (ROBINS-I) tool, in addition to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions recommendations on cross-over studies, for the non-RCTs. We reported continuous outcomes as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) with 95% CIs. All data on glucose concentrations were converted to mg/dL. We contacted authors of included studies to obtain missing data. MAIN RESULTS: From 6394 references, we included four studies evaluating 77 participants, including two RCTs, studying children and adults with hypoglycaemia, respectively, and two non-RCTs with healthy volunteers. The studies included three different routes of glucose administration (sublingual, buccal and a combination of oral and buccal administration). All studies had a high risk of bias in one or more 'Risk of bias' domain.Glucose administration by the sublingual route, in the form of table sugar under the tongue, resulted in a higher blood glucose concentration after 20 minutes compared with the oral route in the very specific setting of children with hypoglycaemia and symptoms of concomitant malaria or respiratory tract infection (MD 17 mg/dL, 95% CI 4.4 to 29.6; P = 0.008; 1 study; 42 participants; very low-quality evidence). Resolution of hypoglycaemia at 80 minutes may favour sublingual administration (RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.24 to 3.54; P = 0.006; 1 study; 42 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but no substantial difference could be demonstrated at 20 minutes (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.74; P = 0.16; 1 study; 42 participants; very low-certainty evidence). A decrease in the time to resolution of hypoglycaemia was found in favour of sublingual administration (MD -51.5 min, 95% CI -58 to -45; P < 0.001; 1 study; 42 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No adverse events were reported in either group. No data were available for resolution of symptoms and time to resolution of symptoms, and treatment delay.Glucose administered by the buccal route in one study resulted in a lower plasma glucose concentration after 20 minutes compared with oral administration (MD -14.4 mg/dL, 95% CI -17.5 to -11.4 for an imputed within-participants correlation coefficient of 0.9; P < 0.001; 1 trial; 16 participants; very low-quality evidence). In another study there were fewer participants with increased blood glucose at 20 minutes favouring oral glucose (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.98; P = 0.05; 1 study; 7 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No data were available for resolution of symptoms and time to resolution of symptoms, resolution of hypoglycaemia and time to resolution of hypoglycaemia, adverse events, and treatment delay.For the combined oral and buccal mucosal route (in the form of a dextrose gel) the MD was -15.3 mg/dL, 95%CI -33.6 to 3; P = 0.09; 1 study; 18 participants; very low-quality evidence . No improvement was identified for either route in the resolution of symptoms at 20 minutes or less following glucose administration (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.14; P = 0.08; 1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No data were available for time to resolution of symptoms, resolution of hypoglycaemia and time to resolution of hypoglycaemia, adverse events, and treatment delay. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: When providing first aid to individuals with hypoglycaemia, oral glucose administration results in a higher blood glucose concentrations after 20 minutes when compared with buccal administration of glucose. A difference in plasma glucose concentration could not be demonstrated, when administering a dextrose gel, defined as "a combined oral and buccal mucosal route" compared to oral administration of a glucose tablet or solution. In the specific population of children with concomitant malaria and respiratory illness, sublingual sugar results in a higher blood glucose concentration after 20 minutes when compared with oral administration.These results need to be interpreted cautiously because our confidence in the body of evidence is very low due to the low number of participants and studies as well as methodological deficiencies in the included studies.

Layperson Ability and Willingness to Use Hemostatic Dressings: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

Background: The Hartford Consensus and Stop the Bleed Campaign empower the public to stop bleeding. While evidence for civilian tourniquet use is mounting, there is limited evidence regarding the public's ability to use hemostatic dressings. This study seeks to determine if laypeople can apply hemostatic dressings, and which hemostatic dressing they can use most successfully. Methods: 360 layperson participants in Maryland and Virginia completed 4 arms of this randomized, prospective controlled trial: plain gauze (control), z-folded gauze, s-rolled gauze, and injectable sponge (experimental) arms. Participants watched a standardized video, practiced hands-on dressing application, and were assessed applying the dressing via checklists and feedback mechanisms for pressure, timing, and packing. Participants completed pre and post questionnaires regarding willingness to use hemostatic dressings. Results: Overall, 202 participants (56%) applied the dressings correctly, and 83 (92%) applied the injectable sponges correctly. This is a significant difference from the other arms (p < 0.001), and OR 17.2 (95% CI 6.8 - 48.1) compared to control. 38 participants (40%) correctly applied plain gauze, while 37 (43%) and 44 (48%) participants correctly applied z-folded and s-rolled gauzes. The primary reasons for failure were not holding pressure long enough (n = 103, 65%) and not applying adequate pressure (n = 64, 41%). Participants in all arms had significant improvements in willingness to use hemostatic dressings: 154 (43.6%) participants pre vs. 344 (97.5%) post study participation (p < 0.001). Conclusions: More than half of laypeople can apply hemostatic dressings, and they are most successful applying injectable sponges. Brief education increases laypeople's reported willingness to use hemostatic dressings. Educators and planners should consider including injectable sponges in their Stop the Bleed programs and products. Level of Evidence: II (RCT with significant difference. One negative criterion for observer blinding).

2017 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations Summary.

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation has initiated a near-continuous review of cardiopulmonary resuscitation science that replaces the previous 5-year cyclic batch-and-queue approach process. This is the first of an annual series of International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations summary articles that will include the cardiopulmonary resuscitation science reviewed by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation in the previous year. The review this year includes 5 basic life support and 1 pediatric Consensuses on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. Each of these includes a summary of the science and its quality based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria and treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force members are provided in Values and Preferences sections. Finally, the task force members have prioritized and listed the top 3 knowledge gaps for each population, intervention, comparator, and outcome question.

Recognition and Awareness of Sepsis by First-Aid Providers in Adults With Suspected Infection: A Scoping Review.

Sepsis accounts for a significant proportion of preventable deaths worldwide and early treatment has been found to be a mainstay of decreasing mortality. Early identification of sepsis in the first-aid setting is critical as this results in a shorter time to hospital presentation and management with antibiotics and initial resuscitation. Our aim was to explore the existing literature related to either sepsis recognition or awareness of sepsis by first-aid providers who are evaluating an adult suspected of an acute infection. Our scoping review was performed as part of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation's (ILCOR) continuous evidence evaluation process to update the 2024 ILCOR Consensus on Science with Treatment Recommendations. We searched Embase, Medline, and Cochrane databases from their inception to January 17, 2023, with updated searches performed on November 21, 2023, and December 2, 2023. The gray literature search was conducted on August 29, 2023. The population included adults presenting with an acute illness exhibiting signs and symptoms of a severe infection. Outcomes included sepsis recognition or awareness of sepsis by a lay first-aid provider. After reviewing 4380 potential sources, four reviews (three systematic reviews and one scoping review), 11 observational studies, and 27 websites met the inclusion criteria. No study directly addressed our PICOST (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, Study Design, and Timeframe) question as none were performed in the first-aid setting. Three systematic reviews and nine observational studies that assessed the ability of early warning scores to detect sepsis and predict adverse outcomes secondary to sepsis had inconsistent results, but many found the screening tools to be useful. One scoping review and one observational study found public knowledge and awareness of sepsis to be variable and dependent upon healthcare employment, location, education level, ethnicity, sex, and age. Signs and symptoms associated with sepsis as listed by gray literature sources fell primarily under nine general categories as a means of educating the public on sepsis recognition. Although this scoping review did not identify any studies that directly addressed our outcomes, it highlights the need for future research to better understand the recognition of sepsis in first-aid settings.

The Ability of First Aid Providers to Recognize Anaphylaxis: A Scoping Review.

Early recognition of anaphylaxis is critical to early treatment and often occurs in the first aid setting. However, the ability of first aid providers to recognize anaphylaxis is unknown. We sought to examine the evidence regarding first aid providers' ability to recognize anaphylaxis. Our scoping review was performed as part of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) continuous evidence evaluation processes to update the 2020 ILCOR Consensus on Science with Treatment Recommendations. We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and the gray literature from 2010 to September 2022. The population included adults and children experiencing anaphylaxis with a description of any specific symptom to a first aid provider. Recognition of anaphylaxis was the primary outcome. Two investigators (DM and PC) reviewed abstracts and extracted and assessed the data. Discrepancies between the reviewers were resolved by discussion and consensus with the ILCOR First Aid Task Force. Out of 957 hits, 17 studies met inclusion criteria: one review and meta-analysis, two experimental studies, and 14 observational studies. We did not identify any studies that directly addressed our PICOST (Population, Intervention, Control, Outcomes, Study Design, and Timeframe) as none were performed in the first aid setting. Articles included individuals who may be first aid providers as patients and parents (n=5), teachers, students or school staff (n=8), caregivers and patients (n= 2) or nannies (n=1). All included studies were conducted in high-income countries. Our scoping review found that signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis were not specific and did not allow for easy identification by the first aid provider. Studies focused on education (n=10) and protocols (n=2) and found that both could have a positive impact on anaphylaxis recognition and management. While we did not identify any clinical studies that directly addressed the ability of first aid providers to identify anaphylaxis, future studies examining education methods and action plans may help improve the identification of anaphylaxis by first aid providers.

Oral rehydration beverages for treating exercise-associated dehydration: a systematic review.Part I: carbohydrate-electrolyte solutions.

OBJECTIVE: Exercise-associated dehydration is a common problem, especially at sporting events. Although there are recommendations to drink a certain volume per kg body mass lost after exercise, there is no clear guidance about the type of rehydration beverage. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness of carbohydrate-electrolyte solutions as a rehydration solution for exercise-associated dehydration. DATA SOURCES: Medline (via the PubMed interface), Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies. The search is up to date until June 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Controlled trials involving adults and children were included if dehydration was the result of physical exercise and if drinking carbohydrate-electrolyte solutions, of any percentage carbohydrate, was compared with drinking water. All languages were included as long as an English abstract was available. DATA EXTRACTION: Data on study design, study population, interventions, outcome measures and study limitations were extracted from each included article. Certainty was assessed using GRADE. DATA SYNTHESIS: Out of 3485 screened articles, 19 studies were included that assessed carbohydrate-electrolyte solutions (0% - 9% carbohydrate) compared with water. Although there is variability amongst the identified studies, drinking 0-3.9% and, especially, 4-9% carbohydrate-electrolyte (CE) solution may be effective for rehydration. CONCLUSIONS: A potential beneficial effect of drinking CE drinks compared with water was seen for many of the reviewed outcomes. Commercial CE drinks (ideally 4-9% CE drinks or alternatively 0-3.9% CE drinks) could be suggested for rehydration in persons with exercise associated dehydration when whole foods are not available.

A systematic review on oral rehydration beverages for treating exerciseassociated dehydrationPart II. The effectiveness of alternatives to carbohydrate-electrolyte drinks.

OBJECTIVE: Dehydration associated with exertion is a commonly encountered condition in the first aid setting, particularly at outdoor sporting events. Part I of this back-to-back review demonstrated that commercial sports drinks can be suggested for effective restoration of fluid balance in dehydrated persons. This systematic review was undertaken to compare alternative liquids, such as milk, beer, and coconut water, with water for effective oral rehydration after prolonged exercise. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase were searched for relevant literature in June 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Controlled experimental and observational studies involving adults and children were included when dehydration was induced by physical exercise and oral rehydration fluids were administered and compared with regular water. No additional food intake accompanied the rehydration drinks or water. Articles in all languages were included if an English abstract was available. DATA EXTRACTION: The study design, study population, intervention, outcome measures, and study limitations were extracted from each included article. DATA SYNTHESIS: Out of 3485 records, 11 studies were included comparing skim or low-fat milk, coconut water, and beer (0-5% alcohol) with water. Four studies showed that drinking skim or low-fat milk, without additional food intake, led to a statistically significant improved volume/hydration status when compared with drinking water. In three trials, no significant differences were shown at multiple timepoints for outcomes related to volume and hydration status following rehydration with fresh coconut water compared with water. Lastly, there is insufficient evidence to recommend beer for rehydration (0-5% alcohol). CONCLUSIONS: Consuming skim or low-fat cow's milk without additional food as compared with water appears to improve volume/hydration status in persons with exercise-induced dehydration. However, evidence is of very low certainty and should be interpreted with caution.

2022 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Pediatric Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; and First Aid Task Forces.

This is the sixth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. This summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation Task Force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews include cardiopulmonary resuscitation during transport; approach to resuscitation after drowning; passive ventilation; minimizing pauses during cardiopulmonary resuscitation; temperature management after cardiac arrest; use of diagnostic point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest; use of vasopressin and corticosteroids during cardiac arrest; coronary angiography after cardiac arrest; public-access defibrillation devices for children; pediatric early warning systems; maintaining normal temperature immediately after birth; suctioning of amniotic fluid at birth; tactile stimulation for resuscitation immediately after birth; use of continuous positive airway pressure for respiratory distress at term birth; respiratory and heart rate monitoring in the delivery room; supraglottic airway use in neonates; prearrest prediction of in-hospital cardiac arrest mortality; basic life support training for likely rescuers of high-risk populations; effect of resuscitation team training; blended learning for life support training; training and recertification for resuscitation instructors; and recovery position for maintenance of breathing and prevention of cardiac arrest. Members from 6 task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria and generated consensus treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in the Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections, and priority knowledge gaps for future research are listed.