ArticleResuscitation plus2024
Impact of sex of bystanders who perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation on return of spontaneous circulation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients: A retrospective, observational study.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The impact of the sex of bystanders who initiate cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients has not been fully elucidated. This study aims to investigate the association between the sex of bystanders who perform CPR and the clinical outcomes of OHCA patients in real-world clinical settings. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, observational study using data from the Okayama City Fire Department in Japan. Patients were categorized based on bystanders' sex. Our primary outcomes were return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Our secondary outcome was 30-day survival and 30-day favorable neurological outcome, defined as Cerebral Performance Category score of 1 or 2. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association between these groups and outcomes. Results: The study included 3,209 patients with a comparable distribution of male (1,540 patients: 48.0%) and female bystanders (1,669 patients: 52.0%) between the groups. Overall, 221 (6.9%) ROSC at hospital arrival, 226 (7.0%) patients had 30-day survival, and 121 (3.8%) patients had 30-day favorable neurological outcomes. Bystander sex (female as reference) did not contribute to ROSC at hospital arrival (adjusted OR [aOR] 1.11, 95% CI: 0.76-1.61), 30-day survival (aOR 1.23, 95% CI: 0.83-1.82), or 30-day favorable neurological outcomes (aOR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.34-1.27). Basic life support education experience was a bystander factor positively associated with ROSC. Patient factors positively associated with ROSC were initial shockable rhythm and witness of cardiac arrest. Conclusion: There were no differences in ROSC, 30-day survival, or 30-day neurological outcomes in OHCA patients based on bystander sex.
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.