2020Prehospital Emergency CareOpen access

Neurological Outcome of Chest Compression-Only Bystander CPR in Asphyxial and Non-Asphyxial Out-Of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: An Observational Study

François Javaudin, Julien Raiffort, Natacha Desce, Valentine Baert, Hervé Hubert, Emmanuel Montassier, Clément Le Cornec, Jean-Baptiste Lascarrou, Quentin Le Bastard, on behalf of the GR-RéAC

Open full text 13 citations

Abstract

Background: According to guidelines and bystander skill, two different methods of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) are feasible: standard CPR (S-CPR) with mouth-to-mouth ventilations and chest compression-only CPR (CO-CPR) without rescue breathing. CO-CPR appears to be most effective for cardiac causes, but there is a lack of evidence for asphyxial causes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Thus, the aim of our study was to compare CO-CPR versus S-CPR in adult OHCA from medical etiologies and assess neurologic outcome in asphyxial and non-asphyxial causes.Methods: Using the French National OHCA Registry (RéAC), we performed a multicenter retrospective study over a five-year period (2013 to 2017). All adult-witnessed OHCA who had benefited from either S-CPR or CO-CPR by bystanders were included. Non-medical causes as well as professional rescuers as witnesses were excluded. The primary end point was 30-day neurological outcome in a weighted population for all medical causes, and then for asphyxial, non-asphyxial and cardiac causes.Results: Of the 8 541 subjects included for all medical causes, 6 742 had a non-asphyxial etiology, including 5 904 of cardiac causes, and 1 799 had an asphyxial OHCA. Among all subjects, 8.6%; 95% CI [8.1-9.3] had a good neurological outcome (i.e. cerebral performance category of 1 or 2). Bystanders who performed S-CPR began more often immediately (89.0%; 95% CI [87.3-90.5] versus 78.2%; 95% CI [77.2-79.2]) and in younger subjects (64.1 years versus 65.7; p < 0.001). In the weighted population, subjects receiving bystander-initiated CO-CPR had an adjusted relative risk (aRR) of 1.04; 95% CI [0.79-1.38] of having a good neurological outcome at 30 days for all medical causes, 1.28; 95% CI [0.92-1.77] for asphyxial etiologies, 1.08; 95% CI [0.80-1.46] for non-asphyxial etiologies and 1.09; 95% CI [0.93-1.28] for cardiac-related OHCA.Conclusions: We observed no significant difference in neurological outcome when lay bystanders of adult OHCA initiated CO-CPR or S-CPR, whether the cause was asphyxial or not.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Background: According to guidelines and bystander skill, two different methods of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) are feasible: standard CPR (S-CPR) with mouth-to-mouth ventilations and chest compression-only CPR (CO-CPR) without rescue breathing. CO-CPR appears to be most effective for cardiac causes, but there is a lack of evidence for asphyxial causes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Thus, the aim of our study was to compare CO-CPR versus S-CPR in adult OHCA from medical etiologies and assess neurologic outcome in asphyxial and non-asphyxial causes.Methods: Using the French National OHCA Registry (RéAC), we performed a multicenter retrospective study over a five-year period (2013 to 2017). All adult-witnessed OHCA who had benefited from either S-CPR or CO-CPR by bystanders were included. Non-medical causes as well as professional rescuers as witnesses were excluded. The primary end point was 30-day neurological outcome in a weighted population for all medical causes, and then for asphyxial, non-asphyxial and cardiac causes.Results: Of the 8 541 subjects included for all medical causes, 6 742 had a non-asphyxial etiology, including 5 904 of cardiac causes, and 1 799 had an asphyxial OHCA. Among all subjects, 8.6%; 95% CI [8.1-9.3] had a good neurological outcome (i.e. cerebral performance category of 1 or 2). Bystanders who performed S-CPR began more often immediately (89.0%; 95% CI [87.3-90.5] versus 78.2%; 95% CI [77.2-79.2]) and in younger subjects (64.1 years versus 65.7; p < 0.001). In the weighted population, subjects receiving bystander-initiated CO-CPR had an adjusted relative risk (aRR) of 1.04; 95% CI [0.79-1.38] of having a good neurological outcome at 30 days for all medical causes, 1.28; 95% CI [0.92-1.77] for asphyxial etiologies, 1.08; 95% CI [0.80-1.46] for non-asphyxial etiologies and 1.09; 95% CI [0.93-1.28] for cardiac-related OHCA.Conclusions: We observed no significant difference in neurological outcome when lay bystanders of adult OHCA initiated CO-CPR or S-CPR, whether the cause was asphyxial or not.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 13 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Background: According to guidelines and bystander skill, two different methods of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) are feasible: standard CPR (S-CPR) with mouth-to-mouth ventilations and chest compression-only CPR (CO-CPR) without rescue breathing. CO-CPR appears to be most effective for cardiac causes, but there is a lack of evidence for asphyxial causes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Thus, the aim of our study was to compare CO-CPR versus S-CPR in adult OHCA from medical etiologies and assess neurologic outcome in asphyxial and non-asphyxial causes.Methods: Using the French National OHCA Registry (RéAC), we performed a multicenter retrospective study over a five-year period (2013 to 2017). All adult-witnessed OHCA who had benefited from either S-CPR or CO-CPR by bystanders were included. Non-medical causes as well as professional rescuers as witnesses were excluded. The primary end point was 30-day neurological outcome in a weighted population for all medical causes, and then for asphyxial, non-asphyxial and cardiac causes.Results: Of the 8 541 subjects included for all medical causes, 6 742 had a non-asphyxial etiology, including 5 904 of cardiac causes, and 1 799 had an asphyxial OHCA. Among all subjects, 8.6%; 95% CI [8.1-9.3] had a good neurological outcome (i.e. cerebral performance category of 1 or 2). Bystanders who performed S-CPR began more often immediately (89.0%; 95% CI [87.3-90.5] versus 78.2%; 95% CI [77.2-79.2]) and in younger subjects (64.1 years versus 65.7; p < 0.001). In the weighted population, subjects receiving bystander-initiated CO-CPR had an adjusted relative risk (aRR) of 1.04; 95% CI [0.79-1.38] of having a good neurological outcome at 30 days for all medical causes, 1.28; 95% CI [0.92-1.77] for asphyxial etiologies, 1.08; 95% CI [0.80-1.46] for non-asphyxial etiologies and 1.09; 95% CI [0.93-1.28] for cardiac-related OHCA.Conclusions: We observed no significant difference in neurological outcome when lay bystanders of adult OHCA initiated CO-CPR or S-CPR, whether the cause was asphyxial or not.

Key concepts: Medicine, Cardiopulmonary resuscitation, Return of spontaneous circulation, Emergency medicine, Observational study, Population, Etiology, Resuscitation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Neurological Outcome of Chest Compression-Only Bystander CPR in Asphyxial and Non-Asphyxial Out-Of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: An Observational Study — Research Paper | ScholarLens