Acute cardiac care & resuscitation
Community basic life support training, automated external defibrillator coverage, and bystander intervention in witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
Main finding · Bystander CPRResult — go to the resultAdjusted odds ratio 1.56 95% CI 1.14–2.14Authors' conclusion
Higher community BLS training rates were associated with a higher odds of bystander CPR, whereas neither BLS training rates nor AED coverage were associated with bystander AED use.
Study context
- Population
- Witnessed OHCA cases in Seoul, South Korea, between 2017 and 2021; communities defined as the 25 administrative districts of Seoulwitnessed OHCA cases included in the analysis
- Participants
- 6,280 cases
- Comparison
- associations of community basic life support (BLS) training rates and automated external defibrillator (AED) coverage with bystander intervention in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA)
Main finding
Bystander CPR
Adjusted odds ratio
1.56
95% CI 1.14–2.14
Highest quartile of BLS training rates vs lowest quartile
aOR 1.56 (95% CI 1.14–2.14)
As reported in the abstract
Further findings
Bystander AED use
- Neither community BLS training rates nor AED coverage were associated with bystander AED use, and no significant interaction was observed
Bystander intervention received
- Received bystander CPR without AED
- 67.0% (4207/6280)
- Received bystander CPR with AED
- 0.7% (47/6280)
Original publication
Community basic life support training, automated external defibrillator coverage, and bystander intervention in witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. Published 17 April 2026. doi:10.
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it