ArticleResuscitation2017
Increased cardiac arrest survival and bystander intervention in enclosed pedestrian walkway systems.
Article in Resuscitation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- What Do Adolescents Learn from a 50 Minute Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/Automated External Defibrillator Education in a Rural Area: A Pre-Post Design.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Impact of Automated External Defibrillator as a Recent Innovation for the Resuscitation of Cardiac Arrest Patients in an Urban City of Japan.Journal of emergencies, trauma, and shockArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCities worldwide have underground or above-ground enclosed walkway systems for pedestrian travel, representing unique environments for studying out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs). The characteristics and outcomes of OHCAs that occur in such systems are unknown.
objectiveTo determine whether OHCAs occurring in enclosed pedestrian walkway systems have differing demographics, prehospital intervention, and survival outcomes compared to the encompassing city, by examining the PATH walkway system in Toronto.
methodsWe identified all atraumatic, public-location OHCAs in Toronto from April 2006 to March 2016. Exclusion criteria were obvious death, existing DNR, and EMS-witnessed OHCAs. OHCAs were classified into mutually exclusive location groups: Toronto, Downtown, and PATH-accessible. PATH-accessible OHCAs were those that occurred within the PATH system between the first basement and third floor. We analyzed demographic, prehospital intervention, and survival data using t-tests and chi-squared tests.
resultsWe identified 2172 OHCAs: 1752 Toronto, 371 Downtown, and 49 PATH-accessible. Compared to Toronto, a significantly higher proportion of PATH-accessible OHCAs was bystander-witnessed (62.6% vs 83.7%, p=0.003), had bystander CPR (56.6% vs 73.5%, p=0.019), bystander AED use (11.0% vs 42.6%, p<0.001), shockable initial rhythm (45.5% vs 72.9%, p<0.001), and overall survival (18.5% vs 33.3%, p=0.009). Similar significant differences were observed when compared to Downtown.
conclusionsThis study suggests that OHCAs in enclosed pedestrian walkway systems are uniquely different from other public settings. Bystander resuscitation efforts are significantly more frequent and survival rates are significantly higher. Urban planners in similar infrastructure systems worldwide should consider these findings when determining AED placement and public engagement strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.