Acute cardiac care & resuscitation
Impact of Bystander Automated External Defibrillator Use on Survival and Functional Outcomes in Shockable Observed Public Cardiac Arrests
Main findingResult — go to the resultOdds ratio 2.73 95% CI 2.17–3.44Authors' conclusion
Bystander automated external defibrillator use before emergency medical services arrival in shockable observed public OHCA was associated with better survival and functional outcomes.
Study context
- Population
- Shockable observed public out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium, 2011–2015shockable of 4115 analysed
- Participants
- 2,500 participants
- Exposure
- Bystander AED shock vs initial defibrillation by EMS
- Outcome
- Discharge with favorable functional status (modified Rankin Score ≤2)
- Follow-up
- Hospital discharge
Methodological detailsmulticentre, 9 regional centres
- Multicentre
- 9 regional centres
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Odds ratio
2.73
95% CI 2.17–3.44
By group
Bystander shockvs EMS
OR 2.73 (95% CI 2.17–3.44)
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Secondary outcomes
| Outcome | Bystander shock | Emergency medical services | Adjusted OR for survival to hospital discharge (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Survival to hospital dischargeAdjusted for known predictors of outcome | 66.5% | 43.0% | 2.62 (2.07–3.31) | |
| 0.20.5125Adjusted OR for survival to hospital discharge (log scale) |
Benefit of bystander shock by EMS response time
- Benefit of bystander shock increased progressively as EMS response time became longer
Original publication
Impact of Bystander Automated External Defibrillator Use on Survival and Functional Outcomes in Shockable Observed Public Cardiac Arrests. Circulation. Published 26 February 2018. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →