Sarah M Perman1,2,3, Shelby K Shelton1, Christopher Knoepke2,4,3,5, Kathryn Rappaport6, Daniel D Matlock7,3,5,8, Kathleen Adelgais6, Edward P Havranek3,9, Stacie L Daugherty2,4,3. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine (S.M.P., S.K.S.), Department of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora. 2. Center for Women's Health Research (S.M.P., C.K., S.L.D.), Department of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora. 3. Colorado Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Group, Denver (S.M.P., C.K., D.D.M., E.P.H., S.L.D.). 4. Division of Cardiology (C.K., S.L.D.), Department of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora. 5. Adult and Child Consortium for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, Aurora, CO (C.K., D.D.M., S.L.D.). 6. Section of Emergency Medicine, Children's Hospital of Colorado, Aurora (K.R., K.A.). 7. Division of Geriatric Medicine (D.D.M.), Department of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora. 8. VA Eastern Colorado Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, Aurora, CO (D.D.M.). 9. Department of Medicine, Denver Health Medical Center, CO (E.P.H.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Women who suffer an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest receive bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) less often than men. Understanding public perceptions of why this occurs is a necessary first step toward equitable application of this potentially life-saving intervention. METHODS: We conducted a national survey of members of the public using Mechanical Turk, Amazon's crowdsourcing platform, to determine reasons why women might receive bystander CPR less often than men. Eligible participants were adults (≥18 years) located in the United States. Responses were excluded if the participant was not able to define CPR correctly. Participants were asked to answer the following free-text question: "Do you have any ideas on why women may be less likely to receive CPR than men when they collapse in public?" Descriptive statistics were used to define the cohort. The free-text response was coded using open coding, and major themes were identified via classical content analysis. RESULTS: In total, 548 subjects were surveyed. Mean age was 38.8 years, and 49.8% were female. Participants were geographically distributed as follows: 18.5% West, 9.2% Southwest, 22.0% Midwest, 27.5% Southeast, and 22.9% Northeast. After analysis, 3 major themes were detected for why the public perceives that women receive less bystander CPR. They include the following: (1) sexualization of women's bodies; (2) women are weak and frail and therefore prone to injury; and (3) misperceptions about women in acute medical distress. Overall, 41.9% (227) were trained in CPR while 4.4% reported having provided CPR in a medical emergency. CONCLUSIONS: Members of the general public perceive fears about inappropriate touching, accusations of sexual assault, and fear of causing injury as inhibiting bystander CPR for women. Educational and policy efforts to address these perceptions may reduce the sex differences in the application of bystander CPR.
BACKGROUND:Women who suffer an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest receive bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) less often than men. Understanding public perceptions of why this occurs is a necessary first step toward equitable application of this potentially life-saving intervention. METHODS: We conducted a national survey of members of the public using Mechanical Turk, Amazon's crowdsourcing platform, to determine reasons why women might receive bystander CPR less often than men. Eligible participants were adults (≥18 years) located in the United States. Responses were excluded if the participant was not able to define CPR correctly. Participants were asked to answer the following free-text question: "Do you have any ideas on why women may be less likely to receive CPR than men when they collapse in public?" Descriptive statistics were used to define the cohort. The free-text response was coded using open coding, and major themes were identified via classical content analysis. RESULTS: In total, 548 subjects were surveyed. Mean age was 38.8 years, and 49.8% were female. Participants were geographically distributed as follows: 18.5% West, 9.2% Southwest, 22.0% Midwest, 27.5% Southeast, and 22.9% Northeast. After analysis, 3 major themes were detected for why the public perceives that women receive less bystander CPR. They include the following: (1) sexualization of women's bodies; (2) women are weak and frail and therefore prone to injury; and (3) misperceptions about women in acute medical distress. Overall, 41.9% (227) were trained in CPR while 4.4% reported having provided CPR in a medical emergency. CONCLUSIONS: Members of the general public perceive fears about inappropriate touching, accusations of sexual assault, and fear of causing injury as inhibiting bystander CPR for women. Educational and policy efforts to address these perceptions may reduce the sex differences in the application of bystander CPR.
Entities:
Keywords:
cardiopulmonary resuscitation; heart arrest; sex
Authors: Sarah M Perman; Shelby K Shelton; Christopher Knoepke; Kathryn Rappaport; Daniel D Matlock; Kathleen Adelgais; Edward P Havranek; Stacie L Daugherty Journal: Circulation Date: 2019-08-26 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Joris Nas; Jos Thannhauser; Lara S F Konijnenberg; Robert-Jan M van Geuns; Niels van Royen; Judith L Bonnes; Marc A Brouwer Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-05-02
Authors: Anne Juul Grabmayr; Linn Andelius; Nanna Bo Christensen; Fredrik Folke; Kristian Bundgaard Ringgren; Christian Torp-Pedersen; Gunnar Gislason; Theo Walther Jensen; Astrid Rolin Kragh; Mads Christian Tofte Gregers; Julie Samsoee Kjoelbye; Carolina Malta Hansen Journal: Resusc Plus Date: 2022-07-01
Authors: Melanie R Wittwer; Emily Aldridge; Cindy Hein; Mel Thorrowgood; Chris Zeitz; John F Beltrame; Margaret A Arstall Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-04-08
Authors: Veronica A Pear; Julia P Schleimer; Elizabeth Tomsich; Rocco Pallin; Amanda Charbonneau; Garen J Wintemute; Christopher E Knoepke Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-10-19 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Angelo Auricchio; Maria Luce Caputo; Enrico Baldi; Catherine Klersy; Claudio Benvenuti; Roberto Cianella; Gaetano Maria De Ferrari; Tiziano Moccetti Journal: Resusc Plus Date: 2020-11-05