OBJECTIVE: Bystander CPR improves survival in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). For adult sudden collapse, bystander chest compression-only CPR (COCPR) is recommended in some circumstances by the American Heart Association and European Resuscitation Council. However, adults who arrest from non-cardiac causes may also receive COCPR. Because rescue breathing may be more important for individuals suffering OHCA secondary to non-cardiac causes, COCPR is not recommended for these cases. We evaluated the relationship of lay rescuer COCPR and survival after OHCA from non-cardiac causes. METHODS: Analysis of a statewide Utstein-style registry of adult OHCA, during a large scale campaign endorsing COCPR for OHCA from presumed cardiac cause. The relationship between lay rescuer CPR (both conventional CPR and COCPR) and survival to hospital discharge was evaluated. RESULTS: Presumed non-cardiac aetiologies of OHCA accounted for 15% of all cases, and lay rescuer CPR was provided in 29% of these cases. Survival to hospital discharge occurred in 3.8% after conventional CPR, 2.7% after COCPR, and 4.0% after no CPR (p=0.85). The proportion of patients receiving COCPR was much lower in the cohort of OHCA from respiratory causes (8.3%) than for those with presumed cardiac OHCA (18.0%; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of a campaign endorsing lay rescuer COCPR for cardiac OHCA, bystanders were less likely to perform COCPR on OHCA victims who might benefit from rescue breathing.
OBJECTIVE: Bystander CPR improves survival in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). For adult sudden collapse, bystander chest compression-only CPR (COCPR) is recommended in some circumstances by the American Heart Association and European Resuscitation Council. However, adults who arrest from non-cardiac causes may also receive COCPR. Because rescue breathing may be more important for individuals suffering OHCA secondary to non-cardiac causes, COCPR is not recommended for these cases. We evaluated the relationship of lay rescuer COCPR and survival after OHCA from non-cardiac causes. METHODS: Analysis of a statewide Utstein-style registry of adult OHCA, during a large scale campaign endorsing COCPR for OHCA from presumed cardiac cause. The relationship between lay rescuer CPR (both conventional CPR and COCPR) and survival to hospital discharge was evaluated. RESULTS: Presumed non-cardiac aetiologies of OHCA accounted for 15% of all cases, and lay rescuer CPR was provided in 29% of these cases. Survival to hospital discharge occurred in 3.8% after conventional CPR, 2.7% after COCPR, and 4.0% after no CPR (p=0.85). The proportion of patients receiving COCPR was much lower in the cohort of OHCA from respiratory causes (8.3%) than for those with presumed cardiac OHCA (18.0%; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of a campaign endorsing lay rescuer COCPR for cardiac OHCA, bystanders were less likely to perform COCPR on OHCA victims who might benefit from rescue breathing.