Association Between Number of Volunteer Responders and Interventions Before Ambulance Arrival for Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Volunteer responder (VR) programs for activation of laypersons in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) have been deployed worldwide, but the optimal number of VRs to dispatch is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between the number of VRs arriving before Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and the proportion of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and defibrillation. METHODS: We included OHCAs not witnessed by EMS with VR activation from the Capital Region (September 2, 2017, to May 14, 2019) and the Central Region of Denmark (November 5, 2018, to December 31, 2019). We created 4 groups according to the number of VRs arriving before EMS: 0, 1, 2, and 3 or more. Using a logistic regression model adjusted for EMS response time, we examined associations between the number of VRs arriving before EMS and bystander CPR and defibrillation. RESULTS: We included 906 OHCAs. The adjusted ORs for bystander CPR were 2.40 (95% CI: 1.42-4.05), 3.18 (95% CI: 1.39-7.26), and 2.70 (95% CI: 1.32-5.52) when 1, 2, or 3 or more VRs arrived before EMS (reference), respectively. The adjusted OR for bystander defibrillation increased when 1 (1.97 [95% CI: 1.12-3.52]), 2 (2.88 [95% CI: 1.48-5.58]), or 3 or more (3.85 [95% CI: 2.11-7.01]) VRs arrived before EMS (reference). The adjusted OR of bystander defibrillation increased to 1.95 (95% CI: 1.18-3.22) when ≥3 VRs arrived first compared with 1 VR arriving first (reference). CONCLUSIONS: We found an association of increased bystander CPR and defibrillation when 1 or more VRs arrived before the EMS with a trend toward increased bystander defibrillation with increasing number of VRs arriving first.

Rendezvous between ambulances and prehospital physicians in the Capital Region of Denmark: a descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: In a two-tier Emergency Medical Services response system with ambulances and physician-staffed rapid response vehicles, both units are ideally dispatched simultaneously when a physician is needed. However, when advanced resources are dispatched secondarily, a meeting point (rendezvous) is established to reduce time to advanced care. This study aims to assess the extent of rendezvous tasks, patient groups involved and physician contribution when rendezvous is activated between the primary ambulances and rapid response vehicles in the Capital Region of Denmark. METHODS: We analysed prehospital electronic patient record data from all rendezvous cases in the Capital Region of Denmark in 2018. Variables included the number of times rendezvous was activated, patient demographics, dispatch criteria, on-scene diagnosis, and prehospital treatment. RESULT: Ambulances requested rendezvous 2340 times, corresponding to 1.3% of all ambulance tasks and 10.7% of all rapid response vehicle dispatches. The most frequently used dispatch criterion was unclear problem n = 561 (28.8%), followed by cardiovascular n = 439 (22.5%) and neurological n = 392 (20.1%). The physician contributed with technical skills like medication n = 760 (39.0%) and advanced airway management n = 161 (8.3%), as well as non-technical skills like team leading during advanced life support n = 152 (7.8%) and decision to end futile treatment and death certificate issuance n = 73 (3.7%). CONCLUSION: Rendezvous between ambulances and physician-staffed rapid response vehicles was activated in 1.3% of all ambulance cases corresponding to 10.7% of all RRV dispatches in 2018. The three largest patient groups in rendezvous presented cardiovascular, neurological, and respiratory problems. The prehospital physician contributed with technical skills like medication and advanced airway management as well as non-technical skills like team leading during advanced life support and ending futile treatment. The high percentage of dispatch criterion unclear problem illustrates the challenge of precise dispatch and optimal use of prehospital resources. Therefore, it seems necessary to have a safe and rapid rendezvous procedure to cope with this uncertainty.

Functionality of registered automated external defibrillators.

AIMS: Little is known about automated external defibrillator (AED) functionality in real-life settings. We aimed to assess the functionality of all registered AEDs in a geographically selected area and calculate the proportion of historical out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) covered by non-functioning AEDs. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study we inspected all registered and available AEDs on the island of Bornholm in Denmark. We collected information on battery status (determined by AED self-test) and electrode status, as well as AED availability. We identified all historical OHCAs registered with the Danish Cardiac Arrest Registry on Bornholm during 2016-2019 and calculated the proportion of OHCAs covered by an AED (regardless of functionality status) within ≤100, ≤750, and ≤1800 meters and the proportion of OHCAs covered by non-functioning AEDs. RESULTS: Of 211 registered AEDs, 181 (81.9%) were publicly accessible and functional. The remaining 40 (18.1%) were not functional, primarily due to expired electrodes (42.5%, n = 17), obstacles to AED retrieval (20.0%, n = 8) or failed self-tests (17.5%, n = 7). Of 197 historical OHCAs, non-functional AEDs resulted in an OHCA coverage loss of 5.6%, 4.1% and 1.0 % for ≤100 m, ≤750 m and ≤1800 m, respectively. CONCLUSION: Almost one-fifth of all registered and publicly available AEDs were not functional, primarily due to expired electrodes, failed self-tests or obstacles to retrieving AEDs. One in twenty historical OHCA was covered by a non-functional AED. Although general AED functionality was high, this finding underlines the importance of regular AED maintenance.

Activation of Citizen Responders to Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest During the COVID-19 Outbreak in Denmark 2020.

Background Little is known about how COVID-19 influenced engagement of citizen responders dispatched to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) by a smartphone application. The objective was to describe and analyze the Danish Citizen Responder Program and bystander interventions (both citizen responders and nondispatched bystanders) during the first COVID-19 lockdown in 2020. Methods and Results All OHCAs from January 1, 2020, to June 30, 2020, with citizen responder activation in 2 regions of Denmark were included. We compared citizen responder engagement for OHCA in the nonlockdown period (January 1, 2020, to March 10, 2020, and April 21, 2020, to June 30, 2020) with the lockdown period (March 11, 2020, to April 20, 2020). Data are displayed in the order lockdown versus nonlockdown period. Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation rates did not differ in the 2 periods (99% versus 92%; P=0.07). Bystander defibrillation (9% versus 14%; P=0.4) or return-of-spontaneous circulation (23% versus 23%; P=1.0) also did not differ. A similar amount of citizen responders accepted alarms during the lockdown (6 per alarm; interquartile range, 6) compared with the nonlockdown period (5 per alarm; interquartile range, 5) (P=0.05). More citizen responders reported performing chest-compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation during lockdown compared with nonlockdown (79% versus 59%; P=0.0029), whereas fewer performed standardized cardiopulmonary resuscitation, including ventilations (19% versus 38%; P=0.0061). Finally, during lockdown, more citizen responders reported being not psychologically affected by attending an OHCA compared with nonlockdown period (68% versus 56%; P<0.0001). Likewise, fewer reported being mildly affected during lockdown (26%) compared with nonlockdown (35%) (P=0.003). Conclusions The COVID-19 lockdown in Denmark was not associated with decreased bystander-initiated resuscitation in OHCAs attended by citizen responders.

Higher resuscitation guideline adherence in paramedics with use of real-time ventilation feedback during simulated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether real-time ventilation feedback would improve provider adherence to ventilation guidelines. DESIGN: Non-blinded randomised controlled simulation trial. SETTING: One Emergency Medical Service trust in Copenhagen. PARTICIPANTS: 32 ambulance crews consisting of 64 on-duty basic or advanced life support paramedics from Copenhagen Emergency Medical Service. INTERVENTION: Participant exposure to real-time ventilation feedback during simulated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was ventilation quality, defined as ventilation guideline-adherence to ventilation rate (8-10 bpm) and tidal volume (500-600 ml) delivered simultaneously. RESULTS: The intervention group performed ventilations in adherence with ventilation guideline recommendations for 75.3% (Interquartile range (IQR) 66.2%-82.9%) of delivered ventilations, compared to 22.1% (IQR 0%-44.0%) provided by the control group. When controlling for participant covariates, adherence to ventilation guidelines was 44.7% higher in participants receiving ventilation feedback. Analysed separately, the intervention group performed a ventilation guideline-compliant rate in 97.4% (IQR 97.1%-100%) of delivered ventilations, versus 66.7% (IQR 40.9%-77.9%) for the control group. For tidal volume compliance, the intervention group reached 77.5% (IQR 64.9%-83.8%) of ventilations within target compared to 53.4% (IQR 8.4%-66.7%) delivered by the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Real-time ventilation feedback increased guideline compliance for both ventilation rate and tidal volume (combined and as individual parameters) in a simulated OHCA setting. Real-time feedback has the potential to improve manual ventilation quality and may allow providers to avoid harmful hyperventilation.

Corrigendum to "Higher resuscitation guideline adherence in paramedics with use of real-time ventilation feedback during simulated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A randomised controlled trial" [Resuscitation Plus 5 (2021) 100082].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.resplu.2021.100082.].

Management of first responder programmes for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest during the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe.

AIM: First responder (FR) programmes dispatch professional FRs (police and/or firefighters) or citizen responders to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and use automated external defibrillators (AED) in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). We aimed to describe management of FR-programmes across Europe in response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: In June 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional survey sent to OHCA registry representatives in 18 European countries with active FR-programmes. The survey was administered by e-mail and included questions regarding management of both citizen responder and FR-programmes. A follow-up question was conducted in October 2020 assessing management during a potential "second wave" of COVID-19. RESULTS: All representatives responded (response rate = 100%). Fourteen regions dispatched citizen responders and 17 regions dispatched professional FRs (9 regions dispatched both). Responses were post-hoc divided into three categories: FR activation continued unchanged, FR activation continued with restrictions, or FR activation temporarily paused. For citizen responders, regions either temporarily paused activation (n = 7, 50.0%) or continued activation with restrictions (n = 7, 50.0%). The most common restriction was to omit rescue breaths and perform compression-only CPR. For professional FRs, nine regions continued activation with restrictions (52.9%) and five regions (29.4%) continued activation unchanged, but with personal protective equipment available for the professional FRs. In three regions (17.6%), activation of professional FRs temporarily paused. CONCLUSION: Most regions changed management of FR-programmes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies are needed to investigate the consequences of pausing or restricting FR-programmes for bystander CPR and AED use, and how this may impact patient outcome.