Perceived threats and challenges experienced by first responders during their mission for an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Aim: No study has systematically captured the perceived threat, discomfort or issues experienced by First Responders (FRs). We aimed to report the FRs’ experience during a mission for an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in a ten-year span. Methods: We collected all the 40-items questionnaires filled out by the FRs dispatched in Ticino Region (Switzerland) from 01/10/2010 to 31/12/2020. We compared results between FRs alerted by SMS or APP and between professional and citizen FRs. Results: 3391 FRs filled the questionnaire. The OHCA information was considered complete more frequently by FRs alerted by APP (85.6% vs 76.8%, p < 0.001), but a challenge in reaching the location was more frequent (15.5% vs 11.4%, p < 0.001), mainly due to wrong GPS coordinate. The FRs initiated/participated in resuscitation in 64.6% and used an AED in 31.9% of OHCAs, without issue in 97.9%. FRs reported a very high-level of satisfaction (97%) in EMS collaboration, but one-third didn’t have the possibility to debrief. Citizen FRs used AED more frequently than professional FRs (34.6% vs 30.7%, p < 0.01), but experienced more often difficulties in performing CPR (2.6% vs 1.2%, p = 0.02) and wore more in need to debrief (19.7% vs 13%, p < 0.01). Conclusions: We provide a unique picture from the FRs’ point of view during a real-life OHCA reporting high-level of satisfaction, great motivation but also the need of systematic debrief. We identified areas of improvements including geolocation accuracy, further training on AED use and support program dedicated to citizen FRs

The Automated External Defibrillator : Heterogeneity of Legislation, Mapping and Use across Europe. New Insights from the ENSURE Study

Introduction: The rapid use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) is crucial for increased survival after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Many factors could play a role in limiting the chance of an AED use. We aimed to verify the situation regarding AED legislation, the AED mapping system and first responders (FRs) equipped with an AED across European countries. Methods: We performed a survey across Europe entitled “European Study about AED Use by Lay Rescuers” (ENSURE), asking the national coordinators of the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest (EuReCa) program to complete it. Results: Nineteen European countries replied to the survey request for a population covering 128,297,955 inhabitants. The results revealed that every citizen can use an AED in 15 countries whereas a training certificate was required in three countries. In one country, only EMS personnel were allowed to use an AED. An AED mapping system and FRs equipped with an AED were available in only 11 countries. The AED use rate was 12–59% where AED mapping and FR systems were implemented, which was considerably higher than in other countries (0–7.9%), reflecting the difference in OHCA survival. Conclusions: Our survey highlighted a heterogeneity in AED legislation, AED mapping systems and AED use in Europe, which was reflected in different AED use and survival

The Automated External Defibrillator : Heterogeneity of Legislation, Mapping and Use across Europe. New Insights from the ENSURE Study

Introduction: The rapid use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) is crucial for increased survival after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Many factors could play a role in limiting the chance of an AED use. We aimed to verify the situation regarding AED legislation, the AED mapping system and first responders (FRs) equipped with an AED across European countries. Methods: We performed a survey across Europe entitled "European Study about AED Use by Lay Rescuers " (ENSURE), asking the national coordinators of the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest (EuReCa) program to complete it. Results: Nineteen European countries replied to the survey request for a population covering 128,297,955 inhabitants. The results revealed that every citizen can use an AED in 15 countries whereas a training certificate was required in three countries. In one country, only EMS personnel were allowed to use an AED. An AED mapping system and FRs equipped with an AED were available in only 11 countries. The AED use rate was 12-59% where AED mapping and FR systems were implemented, which was considerably higher than in other countries (0-7.9%), reflecting the difference in OHCA survival. Conclusions: Our survey highlighted a heterogeneity in AED legislation, AED mapping systems and AED use in Europe, which was reflected in different AED use and survival.Peer reviewe

The automated external defibrillator: Heterogeneity of legislation, mapping and use across europe. new insights from the ensure study

Introduction: The rapid use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) is crucial for increased survival after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Many factors could play a role in limiting the chance of an AED use. We aimed to verify the situation regarding AED legislation, the AED mapping system and first responders (FRs) equipped with an AED across European countries. Methods: We performed a survey across Europe entitled “European Study about AED Use by Lay Rescuers” (ENSURE), asking the national coordinators of the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest (EuReCa) program to complete it. Results: Nineteen European countries replied to the survey re-quest for a population covering 128,297,955 inhabitants. The results revealed that every citizen can use an AED in 15 countries whereas a training certificate was required in three countries. In one country, only EMS personnel were allowed to use an AED. An AED mapping system and FRs equipped with an AED were available in only 11 countries. The AED use rate was 12–59% where AED mapping and FR systems were implemented, which was considerably higher than in other countries (0–7.9%), reflecting the difference in OHCA survival. Conclusions: Our survey highlighted a heterogeneity in AED legislation, AED mapping systems and AED use in Europe, which was re-flected in different AED use and survival

Three-year trends in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest across the world : second report from the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR)

Background The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) Research and Registries Working Group previously reported data on systems of care and outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in 2015 from 16 national and regional registries. To describe the temporal trends with updated data on OHCA, we report the characteristics of OHCA from 2015 through 2017. Methods We invited national and regional population-based OHCA registries for voluntary participation and included emergency medical services (EMS)-treated OHCA. We collected descriptive summary data of core elements of the latest Utstein style recommendation during 2016 and 2017 at each registry. For registries that participated in the previous 2015 report, we also extracted the 2015 data. Results Eleven national registries in North America, Europe, Asia, and Oceania, and 4 regional registries in Europe were included in this report. Across registries, the estimated annual incidence of EMS-treated OHCA was 30.0–97.1 individuals per 100,000 population in 2015, 36.4–97.3 in 2016, and 40.8–100.2 in 2017. The provision of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) varied from 37.2% to 79.0% in 2015, from 2.9% to 78.4% in 2016, and from 4.1% to 80.3% in 2017. Survival to hospital discharge or 30-day survival for EMS-treated OHCA ranged from 5.2% to 15.7% in 2015, from 6.2% to 15.8% in 2016, and from 4.6% to 16.4% in 2017. Conclusion We observed an upward temporal trend in provision of bystander CPR in most registries. Although some registries showed favourable temporal trends in survival, less than half of registries in our study demonstrated such a trend