Socioeconomic Status Is Associated with Provision of Bystander Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation

Objective. Although socioeconomic status (SES) has been linked to multiple health outcomes, there have been few studies of the effect of SES on the provision of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during cardiac arrest events and no studies that we know of on the effect of SES on the provision of dispatcher-assisted bystander CPR. This study sought to define the relationship between SES and the provision of bystander CPR in an emergency medical system that includes dispatcher-provided CPR instructions. Methods. This study was a retrospective, cohort analysis of cardiac arrests due to cardiac causes occurring in private residences in King County, Washington, from January 1, 1999, to December 31, 2005. We used the tax-assessed value of the location of the cardiac arrest as an estimate of the SES of potential bystanders as well as multiple measures from 2000 Census data (education, employment, median household income, and race/ethnicity). We also examined the effect of patient and system characteristics that may affect the provision of bystander CPR. Logistic regression models were used to analyze the association of these factors with two outcomes: the provision of bystander CPR with and without dispatcher assistance. Results. Forty-four percent (1,151/2,618) of cardiac arrest victims received bystander CPR. Four hundred fifty-seven people (17.5% of the entire study population, 39.7% of those who received any bystander CPR) received CPR without telephone instructions. A total of 694 people received dispatcher-assisted bystander CPR (25.6% of the entire population, 60.4% of those receiving any bystander CPR). After adjusting for demographic and care factors, we found a strong association between the tax-assessed value of the cardiac arrest location and increased odds of the provision of bystander CPR without dispatcher instructions and bystander CPR with dispatcher assistance compared with no bystander CPR. Conclusions. This study suggests that higher bystander SES is associated with increased rates of bystander CPR with and without dispatcher instructions. CPR training programs that target lower-SES communities and assessment of these training methods may be warranted.     

Who Gets Bystander Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in a Witnessed Arrest?

Objective: To identify characteristics associated with provision of bystander CPR in witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest cases.
Methods: An observational, prospective, cohort study was performed using cardiac arrest cases as identified by emergency medical services (EMS) agencies in Oakland County, MI, from July 1, 1989, to December 31, 1993. All patients who sustained a witnessed arrest prior to arrival of EMS personnel were reviewed.
Results: Of the 927 patients meeting entry criteria, the 229 patients receiving bystander CPR were younger: 60.9 ± 14.7 vs 67.9 ± 14.7 years (p < 0.01). Most (76.6%) cardiac arrests occurred in the home. In a multivariate logistic model, only the location of arrest outside the home was a significant predictor of receiving bystander CPR [odds ratio (OR) 3.8; 99% CI 2.5, 5.9]. Arrests outside the home were associated with significantly improved outcome, with 18.2% of out-of-home and 8.2% of in-home victims discharged from the hospital alive (OR 2.5; 99% CI 1.4, 4.4).
Conclusion: Patients who have had witnessed cardiac arrests outside the home are nearly 4 times more likely to receive bystander CPR, and are twice as likely to survive. This observation emphasizes the need for CPR training of family members in the authors' locale. This phenomenon may also represent a significant con-founder in studies of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and resuscitation.     

Estimating cost-effectiveness of mass cardiopulmonary resuscitation training strategies to improve survival from cardiac arrest in private locations

Introduction

Most cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) trainees are young, and most cardiac arrests occur in private residences witnessed by older individuals.

Objective

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of a CPR training program targeted at citizens over the age of 50 years compared with that of current nontargeted public CPR training.

Methods

A model was developed using cardiac arrest and known demographic data from a single suburban zip code (population 36,325) including: local data (1997-1999) regarding cardiac arrest locations (public vs. private); incremental survival with CPR (historical survival rate 7.8%, adjusted odds ratio for CPR 2.0); arrest bystander demographics obtained from bystander telephone interviews; zip code demographics regarding population age and distribution; and $12.50 per student for the cost of CPR training. Published rates of CPR training programs by age were used to estimate the numbers typically trained. Several assumptions were made: 1) there would be one bystander per arrest; 2) the bystander would always perform CPR if trained; 3) cardiac arrest would be evenly distributed in the population; and 4) CPR training for a proportion of the population would proportionally increase CPR provision. Rates of arrest, bystanders by age, number of CPR trainees needed to result in increased arrest survival, and training cost per life saved for a one-year study period were calculated.

Results

There were 24.3 cardiac arrests per year, with 21.9 (90%) occurring in homes. In 66.5% of the home arrests, the bystander was more than 50 years old. To yield one additional survivor using the current CPR training strategy, 12,306 people needed to be trained (3,510 bystanders aged ≤50 years and 8,796 bystanders aged >50 years), which resulted in CPR provision to 7.14 additional patients. The training cost per life saved for a bystander aged ≤50 years was $313,214, and that for a bystander aged >50 years was $785,040. Using a strategy of training only those ≤50 years, 583 elders per cardiac arrest would need to be trained, with a cost of $53,383 per life saved.

Conclusion

Using these assumptions, current CPR training strategy is not a cost-effective intervention for home cardiac arrests. The high rate of elders witnessing CPR mandates focused CPR interventions for this population.     

Evaluating Barriers to Bystander CPR among Laypersons before and after Compression-only CPR Training

Objective: Bystander CPR is an essential part of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) survival. EMS and public safety jurisdictions have embraced initiatives to teach compression-only CPR to laypersons in order to increase rates of bystander CPR. We examined barriers to bystander CPR amongst laypersons participating in community compression-only CPR training and the ability of the training to alleviate these barriers. The barriers analyzed include fear of litigation, risk of disease transmission, fear of hurting someone as a result of doing CPR when unnecessary, and fear of hurting someone as a result of doing CPR incorrectly. Methods: Laypersons attending community compression-only CPR training were administered surveys before and after community CPR training. Data were analyzed via standard statistical analyses. Results: A total of 238 surveys were collected and analyzed between September 2015 and January 2016. The most common reported motivation for attending CPR training was “to be prepared/just in case” followed by “infant or child at home.” Respondents reported that they were significantly more likely to perform CPR on a family member than a stranger in both pre-and post-training responses. Nevertheless, reported self-confidence in and likelihood of doing CPR on both family and strangers increased from pre-training to post-training. There was a statistically significant decrease in reported likelihood of all four barriers to prevent respondents from performing bystander CPR when pre-training responses were compared to post-training responses. Previous CPR training and history of having witnessed a sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) were both associated with decreased barriers to CPR, but previous training had no effect on reported likelihood of or confidence in performing CPR. Conclusion: The training initiative studied significantly reduced the reported likelihood of all barriers studied to prevent respondents from performing bystander CPR and also increased the reported confidence in doing CPR and likelihood of doing CPR on both strangers and family. However, it did not alleviate the pre-training discrepancy between likelihood of performing CPR on strangers versus family. Previous CPR training or certification had no impact on likelihood of or confidence in performing CPR.     

Dispatcher instruction of chest compression-only CPR increases actual provision of bystander CPR

BackgroundA preceding randomized controlled trial demonstrated that chest compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) instruction by dispatcher was more effective to increase bystander CPR than conventional CPR instruction. However, the actual condition of implementation of each type of dispatcher instruction (chest compression-only CPR [CCCPR] or conventional CPR with rescue breathing) and provision of bystander CPR in real prehospital settings has not been sufficiently investigated.MethodsThis registry prospectively enrolled patients aged =>18 years suffering an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) of non-traumatic causes before emergency-medical-service (EMS) arrival, who were considered as target subjects of dispatcher instruction, resuscitated by EMS personnel, and transported to medical institutions in Osaka, Japan from January 2005 through December 2012. The primary outcome measure was provision of CPR by a bystander. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to assess factors that were potentially associated with provision of bystander CPR.ResultsAmong 37,283 target subjects of dispatcher instruction, 5743 received CCCPR instruction and 13,926 received conventional CPR instruction. The proportion of CCCPR instruction increased from 5.7% in 2005 to 25.6% in 2012 (p for trend <0.001). The CCCPR instruction group received bystander CPR more frequently than conventional CPR instruction group (70.0% versus 62.1%, p < 0.001). In the multivariable analysis, CCCPR dispatcher instruction was significantly associated with provision of bystander CPR compared with conventional CPR instruction (adjusted odds ratio 1.44, 95% CI 1.34–1.55).ConclusionsCCCPR dispatcher instruction among adult OHCA patients significantly increased the actual provision of bystander CPR.     

The need for head rotation and abdominal compressions during bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation

The current AHA-ECC guidelines for basic life support focus on the provision of good chest compressions with minimal interruptions for patients with presumed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Moreover, international consensus guidelines now support the use of chest compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) instructions for dispatcher-assisted CPR given over the phone to untrained bystanders. However, evidence that strongly challenge these recommendations have been overlooked. A review of this evidence argues for the need for head rotation (a hands-free method of airway control) and abdominal compressions during bystander CPR.     

CPR Training and CPR Performance: Do CPR‐trained Bystanders Perform CPR?

Objectives: To determine factors associated with cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) provision by CPR‐trained bystanders and to determine factors associated with CPR performance by trained bystanders. Methods: The authors performed a prospective, observational study (January 1997 to May 2003) of individuals who called 911 (bystanders) at the time of an out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest. A structured telephone interview of adult cardiac‐arrest bystanders was performed beginning two weeks after the incident. Elements gathered during interviews included bystander and patient demographics, identifying whether the bystander was CPR trained, when and by whom the CPR was performed, and describing the circumstances of the event. If CPR was not performed, we asked the bystanders why CPR was not performed. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for factors associated with CPR performance. Results: Of 868 cardiac arrests, 684 (78.1%) bystander interviews were completed. Of all bystanders interviewed, 69.6% were family members of the victims, 36.8% of the bystanders had more than a high‐school education, and 54.1% had been taught CPR at some time. In 21.2% of patients, the bystander immediately started CPR, and in 33.6% of cases, someone started CPR before the arrival of emergency medical services (EMS). Important overall predictors of CPR performance were the following: witnessed arrest (OR = 2.3; 95% CI = 1.4 to 3.8); bystander was CPR trained (OR = 6.6; 95% CI = 3.5 to 12.5); bystander had more than a high‐school education (OR = 2.0; 95% CI = 1.2 to 3.1), or arrest occurred in a public location (OR = 3.1; 95% CI = 1.7 to 5.8). These variables were significant predictors of CPR performance among CPR‐trained bystanders, as was CPR training within five years (OR = 4.5; 95% CI = 2.8 to 7.3). Common reasons that the CPR‐trained bystanders cited for not performing CPR were the following: 37.5% stated that they panicked, 9.1% perceived that they would not be able to do CPR correctly, and 1.1% thought that they would hurt the patient. Surprisingly, only 1.1% objected to performing mouth‐to‐mouth resuscitation. Conclusions: A minority of CPR‐trained bystanders performed CPR. CPR provision was more common in CPR‐trained bystanders with more than a high‐school education and when CPR training had been within five years. Previously espoused reasons for not doing CPR (mouth‐to‐mouth, infectious‐disease risk) were not the reasons that bystanders cited for not doing CPR. Further work is needed to maximize CPR provision after CPR training.     

Efficacy of bystander CPR: intervention by lay people and by health care professionals

BACKGROUND: Early cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by bystanders prior to the arrival of the rescue team has been shown to be associated with increased survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The aim of this survey was to evaluate the impact on survival of no bystander CPR, lay bystander CPR and professional bystander CPR. METHODS: Patients suffering an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Sweden between 1990 and 2002 who were given CPR and were not witnessed by the ambulance crew were included. RESULTS: In all, 29,711 patients were included, 36% of whom received bystander CPR prior to the arrival of the rescue team. Among the latter, 72% received CPR from lay people and 28% from professionals. Survival to 1 month was 2.2% among those who received no bystander CPR, 4.9% among those who received bystander CPR from lay people (p<0.0001) and 9.2% among those who received bystander CPR from professionals (p<0.0001 compared with bystander CPR by lay people). In a multivariate analysis, lay bystander CPR was associated with improved survival compared to no bystander CPR (OR: 2.04; 95% CI: 1.72-2.42), and professional bystander CPR was associated with improved survival compared to lay bystander CPR (OR: 1.37; 95% CI: 1.12-1.67). CONCLUSION: Among patients suffering an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, bystander CPR by lay persons (excluding health care professionals) is associated with an increased chance of survival. Furthermore, there is a distinction between lay persons and health care providers; survival is higher when the latter perform bystander CPR. However, these results may not be explained by differences in the quality of CPR.     

CPR knowledge and attitude to performing bystander CPR among secondary school students in Norway

Background

Early bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is essential for survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Young people are potentially important bystander CPR providers, as basic life support (BLS) training can be distributed widely as part of the school curriculum.

Methods

Questionnaires were distributed to nine secondary schools in North Norway, and 376 respondents (age 16-19 years) were included. The completed questionnaires were statistically analysed to assess CPR knowledge and attitude to performing bystander CPR.

Results

Theoretical knowledge of handling an apparently unresponsive adult person was high, and 90% knew the national medical emergency telephone number (113). The majority (83%) was willing to perform bystander CPR in a given situation with cardiac arrest. However, when presented with realistic hypothetical cardiac arrest scenarios, the option to provide full BLS was less frequently chosen, to e.g. a family member (74%), a child (67%) or an intravenous drug user (18%). Students with BLS training in school and self-reported confidence in their own BLS skills reported stronger willingness to perform BLS. 8% had personally witnessed a cardiac arrest, and among these 16% had performed full BLS. Most students (86%) supported mandatory BLS training in school, and three out of four wanted to receive additional training.

Conclusion

Young Norwegians are motivated to perform bystander CPR, but barriers are still seen when more detailed cardiac arrest scenarios are presented. By providing students with good quality BLS training in school, the upcoming generation in Norway may strengthen the first part of the chain of survival in OHCA.     

A cross-sectional survey examining cardiopulmonary resuscitation training in households with heart disease

BackgroundHeart disease significantly increases the risk of further cardiac events including out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Given the majority of OHCAs occur in the home, family members of those with heart disease should be trained in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).AimTo describe CPR training rates in households with heart disease, and examine if training increases knowledge, confidence and willingness to perform CPR in this population.MethodsA cross-sectional, telephone survey was conducted with adults residing in Victoria, Australia.FindingsOf 404 respondents, 78 (19.3%) reported the presence of heart disease in their household. Prevalence of CPR training was the same among households with (67.9%) and without (67.8%) heart disease, with the majority (51.5%) receiving training more than five years ago. There were no significant differences in barriers to training- the most prevalent barrier was lack of awareness to seek training. Among households with heart disease, physical ability was the most common concern relating to the provision of CPR, while households without heart disease described decreased confidence. Those with heart disease in their household who were CPR trained, had higher self-ratings of CPR knowledge and confidence, and were more willing to perform CPR (all p < 0.05).ConclusionsA large proportion of Victorians with heart disease in their household did not have recent CPR training. CPR training should be targeted to high-risk households containing a member with heart disease, as knowledge and confidence in skills are increased. Cardiac health professionals are well placed to provide CPR training information during patient contacts.     

Comparison of chest compression only and standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Singapore

OBJECTIVE: Chest compression only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CC-CPR) without ventilation has been proposed as an alternative to standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for bystanders. However, there has been controversy regarding the relative effectiveness of both of these techniques. We aim to compare the outcomes of cardiac arrest patients in the cardiac arrest and resuscitation epidemiology study who either received CC-CPR, standard CPR or no bystander CPR. METHODS: This prospective cohort study involved all out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients attended to by emergency medical service (EMS) providers in a large urban centre. The data analyses were conducted secondarily on these collected data. The technique of bystander CPR was reported by paramedics who arrived at the scene. RESULTS: From 1 October 2001 to 14 October 2004, 2428 patients were enrolled into the study. Of these, 255 were EMS-witnessed arrests and were excluded. 1695 cases did not receive any bystander CPR, 287 had standard CPR and 154 CC-CPR. Patient characteristics were similar in both the standard and CC-CPR groups except for a higher incidence of residential arrests and previous heart disease sufferers in the CC-CPR group. Patients who received standard CPR (odds ratio (OR) 5.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.1-14.0) or CC-CPR (OR 5.0, 95% CI 1.5-16.4) were more likely to survive to discharge than those who had no bystander CPR. There was no significant difference in survival to discharge between those who received CC-CPR and standard CPR (OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.3-3.1). CONCLUSION: We found that patients were more likely to survive with any form of bystander CPR than without. This emphasises the importance of chest compressions for OHCA patients, whether with or without ventilation.     

The three-phase model of cardiac arrest as applied to ventricular fibrillation in a large, urban emergency medical services system

BACKGROUND: Cardiac arrest is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality, with consistently poor outcomes despite the rapid availability of prehospital personnel for defibrillation attempts in patients with ventricular fibrillation (VF). Recent evidence suggests a period of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) prior to defibrillation attempts may improve outcomes in patients with moderate time since collapse (4-10 min). OBJECTIVES: To determine cardiac arrest outcomes in our community and explore the relationship between time since collapse, performance of bystander CPR, and survival. METHODS: Non-traumatic cardiac arrest data were collected prospectively over an 18-month period. Patients were excluded for: age <18 years, a "Do Not Attempt Resuscitation" (DNAR) directive, determination of a non-cardiac etiology for arrest, and an initially recorded rhythm other than VF. Patients were stratified by time since collapse (<4, 4-10, > 10 min, and unknown) and compared with regard to survival and neurological outcome. In addition, patients with and without bystander CPR were compared with regard to survival. RESULTS:: A total of 1141 adult non-traumatic cardiac arrest victims were identified over the 18-month study period. This included 272 patients with VF as the initially recorded rhythm. Of these, 185 had a suspected cardiac etiology for the arrest; survival to hospital discharge was 15% in this group, with 82% of these having a good outcome or only moderate disability. Survival was highest among patients with time since collapse of less than 4 min and decreased with increasing time since collapse. There were no survivors among patients with time since collapse greater than 10 min. Among patients with time since collapse of 4 min or longer, survival was significantly higher with the performance of bystander CPR; there was no survival advantage to bystander CPR among patients with time since collapse less than 4 min. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of bystander CPR prior to defibrillation by EMS personnel is associated with improved survival among patients with time since collapse longer than 4 min but not less than 4 min. These data are consistent with the three-phase model of cardiac arrest.     

Quality of care in elder emergency department patients with pneumonia: a prospective cohort study

Background

Overall survival rates for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest rarely exceed 5%. While bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) can increase survival for cardiac arrest victims by up to four times, bystander CPR rates remain low in Canada (15%). Most cardiac arrest victims are men in their sixties, they usually collapse in their own home (85%) and the event is witnessed 50% of the time. These statistics would appear to support a strategy of targeted CPR training for an older population that is most likely to witness a cardiac arrest event. However, interest in CPR training appears to decrease with advancing age. Behaviour surrounding CPR training and performance has never been studied using well validated behavioural theories.

Methods/Design

The overall goal of this study is to conduct a survey to better understand the behavioural factors influencing CPR training and performance in men and women 55 years of age and older. The study will proceed in three phases. In phase one, semi-structured qualitative interviews will be conducted and recorded to identify common categories and themes regarding seeking CPR training and providing CPR to a cardiac arrest victim. The themes identified in the first phase will be used in phase two to develop, pilot-test, and refine a survey instrument based upon the Theory of Planned Behaviour. In the third phase of the project, the final survey will be administered to a sample of the study population over the telephone. Analyses will include measures of sampling bias, reliability of the measures, construct validity, as well as multiple regression analyses to identify constructs and beliefs most salient to seniors' decisions about whether to attend CPR classes or perform CPR on a cardiac arrest victim.

Discussion

The results of this survey will provide valuable insight into factors influencing the interest in CPR training and performance among a targeted group of individuals most susceptible to witnessing a victim in cardiac arrest. The findings can then be applied to the design of trials of various interventions designed to promote attendance at CPR classes and improve CPR performance.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00665288     

Type of bystander and rate of cardiopulmonary resuscitation in nursing home patients suffering out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

AimWe investigated bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) provision rate and survival outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients in nursing homes by bystander type.MethodsA population-based observational study was conducted for nursing home OHCAs during 2013–2018. The exposure was the bystander type: medical staff, non-medical staff, or family. The primary outcome was bystander CPR provision rate; the secondary outcomes were prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival to discharge. Multivariable logistic regression analysis which corrected for various demographic and clinical characteristics evaluated bystander type impact on study outcomes. Bystander CPR rate trend was investigated by bystander type.ResultsOf 8281 eligible OHCA patients, 26.0%, 70.8%, and 3.2% cases were detected by medical staff, non-medical staff, and family, respectively. Provision rate of bystander CPR was 69.9% and rate of bystander defibrillation was 0.4% in total. Bystander CPR was provided by medical staff, non-medical staff, and families in 74.8%, 68.9%, and 52.1% respectively. Total survival rate was 2.2%, out of which, 3.3% was for medical staff, 3.2% for non-medical staff, and 0.6% for family. Compared to the results of detection by medical staff, the adjusted odds ratios (95% CIs) for provision of bystander CPR were 0.56 (0.49–0.63) for detection by non-medical staff and 0.33 (0.25–0.44) for detection by family. The bystander CPR rates of all three groups increased over time, and among them, the medical staff group increased the most. For prehospital ROSC and survival to discharge, no significant differences were observed according to bystander type.ConclusionAlthough OHCA was detected more often by non-medical staff, they provided bystander CPR less frequently than the medical staff did. To improve survival outcome of nursing home OHCA, bundle interventions including increasing the usage of automated external defibrillators and expanding CPR training for non-medical staff in nursing home are needed.     

Acute myocardial infarction in the prehospital setting

Despite research and public education, myocardial disease, infarction, and death from cardiac arrest continue to be one of the top public health issues. Many patients experiencing AMIs access health care and receive initial treatment from EMS personnel in the prehospital setting. Prompt identification and diagnosis of these patients, relief of chest pain, and shortening delays to definitive care can decrease morbidity and mortality. Prehospital diagnosis of AMI is enhanced with the use of 12-lead electrocardiograms, which can shorten time to thrombolysis or angiography. Prehospital use of thrombolytic agents has not gained widespread use in this country; it is, however, commonplace in Europe, where research suggests improved outcomes when thrombolysis is initiated prior to hospital arrival. Resuscitation of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients is difficult, resulting in dismal survival rates. Factors that appear to be associated with enhanced survival are witnessed arrest, bystander CPR, and short response times to defibrillation.     

Efficacy of chest compression-only BLS CPR in the presence of an occluded airway

Reluctance of the lay public to perform bystander CPR is becoming an increasingly worrisome problem in the USA. Most bystanders who admit such reluctance concede that fear of contagious disease from mouth-to-mouth contact is what keeps them from performing basic life support. Animal models of prehospital cardiac arrest indicates that 24-h survival is essentially as good with chest compression-only CPR as with chest compressions and assisted ventilation. This simpler technique is an attractive alternative strategy for encouraging more bystander participation. Such experimental studies have been criticized as irrelevant however secondary to differences between human and porcine airway mechanics. This study examined the effect of chest compression-only CPR under the worst possible circumstances where the airway was totally occluded. After 6 min of either standard CPR including ventilation with a patent airway or chest compressions-only with a totally occluded airway, no difference in 24 h survival was found (10/10 vs. 9/10). As anticipated arterial blood gases were not as good, but hemodynamics produced were better with chest compression-only CPR (P < 0.05). Chest compression-only CPR, even with a totally occluded airway, is as good as standard CPR for successful outcome following 6.5 min of cardiac arrest. Such a strategy for the first minutes of cardiac arrest, particularly before professional help arrives, has several advantages including increased acceptability to the lay public.     

Public perceptions and experiences of myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest and CPR in London

INTRODUCTION: The lay public have limited knowledge of the symptoms of myocardial infarction ("heart attack"), and inaccurate perceptions of cardiac arrest survival rates. Levels of CPR training and willingness to intervene in cardiac emergencies are also low. AIMS: To explore public perceptions of myocardial infarction and cardiac arrest; investigate perceptions of cardiac arrest survival rates; assess levels of training and attitudes towards CPR, and explore the types of interventions considered useful for increasing rates of bystander CPR among Greater London residents. METHODS: A quantitative interview survey was conducted with 1011 Greater London residents. Eight focus groups were also conducted to explore a range of issues in greater depth and validate trends that emerged in the initial survey. RESULTS: Chest pain was the most commonly recognised symptom of "heart attack". Around half of the respondents were aware that a myocardial infarction differs from a cardiac arrest, although their ability to explain this difference was limited. The majority overestimated that at least a quarter of cardiac arrest patients in London survive to hospital discharge. Few participants had received CPR training, and most were hesitant about performing the procedure on a stranger. CONCLUSIONS: Awareness and knowledge of CPR, and reactions to cardiac emergencies, reflect relatively low levels of CPR training in London. Publicising cardiac arrest survival figures may be instrumental in prompting members of the public to train in CPR and motivating those who have been trained to intervene in a cardiac emergency.