ArticleResuscitation plus2024
Bystander defibrillation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Ireland.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: To describe and explore predictors of bystander defibrillation in Ireland during the period 2012 to 2020. To examine the relationship between bystander defibrillation and health system developments. Methods: National level Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA) registry data were interrogated, focusing on patients who had defibrillation performed. Bystander defibrillation (as compared to EMS initiated defibrillation) was the key outcome of concern. Logistic regression models were built and refined by fitting predictors, performing stepwise variable selection and by adding pairwise interactions that improved fit. Results: The data included 5,751 cases of OHCA where defibrillation was performed. Increasing year over time (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.13, 1.21) was associated with increased adjusted odds of bystander defibrillation. Non-cardiac aetiology was associated with reduced adjusted odds of bystander defibrillation (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.21, 0.42), as were increasing age in years (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.987, 0.996) and night-time occurrence of OHCA (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.53, 0.83). Six further variables in the final model (sex, call response interval, incident location (home or other), who witnessed collapse (bystander or not witnessed), urban or rural location, and the COVID period) were involved in significant interactions. Bystander defibrillation was in general less likely in urban settings and at home locations. Whilst women were less likely to receive bystander defibrillation overall, in witnessed OHCAs, occurring outside the home, in urban areas and outside of the COVID-19 period women were more likely, to receive bystander defibrillation. Conclusions: Defibrillation by bystanders has increased incrementally over time in Ireland. Interventions to address sex and age-based disparities, alongside interventions to increase bystander defibrillation at night, in urban settings and at home locations are required.
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.