MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3212879261 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehab724.0653

The role of bystander-initiated basic life support in exercise-related sudden cardiac arrest: a systematic review

2021· review· en· W3212879261 sur OpenAlexaff
Nicholas Grubic, Braeden Hill, Dermot Phelan, Aaron L. Baggish, Paul Dorian, Amer M. Johri

Notice bibliographique

RevueEuropean Heart Journal · 2021
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Établissements canadiensUniversity of TorontoQueen's University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineCINAHLMEDLINEObservational studyCardiopulmonary resuscitationSudden cardiac arrestPopulationSudden cardiac deathSystematic reviewCochrane LibraryGrey literaturePsychological interventionPhysical therapyEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicineMeta-analysisResuscitationPsychiatry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) is the leading cause of death amongst athletes and a common cause of death during exercise. Although the provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillator (AED) use by bystanders improves outcomes after SCA, the impact of these interventions within exertional settings requires further investigation. Purpose The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the role of bystander CPR and AED use on survival after exercise-related SCA. Methods Literature searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Cochrane Library were queried from inception until November 2020 using a comprehensive search strategy. Grey literature searches of Google Scholar and CADTH Grey Matters were also performed. Abstract screening, full-text review, and data extraction of eligible studies was conducted independently by two reviewers, with any conflicts discussed until consensus reached. Eligible studies included observational research studies assessing a population of exercise-related SCAs (defined as an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest which occurred during exercise or within 1-hour of cessation of activity), where the rate of bystander CPR and/or AED use was provided, and survival outcomes were reported. Abstracts, studies with overlapping patient data, and/or studies of n≤10 were excluded. Among studies with similar populations, the overall rates (median, range) of bystander CPR, AED use, and survival outcomes were calculated. Results A total of 3,718 records were identified from literature searches, and after removal of duplicates, 2,850 were screened. Among those screened, 176 articles were selected for full-text review, of which 29 studies were included in this review. Majority of included studies were cohort studies (2 case series and 2 cross-sectional), with a median sample size of 91. Most patients who suffered from an exercise-related SCA were male, middle-aged, and presented with a shockable arrest rhythm. The median rate of bystander CPR reported amongst 22 studies was 71% (31%-100%), whereas the median rate of bystander AED use reported amongst 16 studies was 31% (2%-100%) (Table). Among the 19 studies which reported the rate of survival to hospital discharge, survival ranged from 11% to 77%, with a median rate of 32% (Table). Patients who survived to hospital discharge more frequently received bystander CPR and had an AED applied than patients who died (Figure). Conclusions Survival rates after exercise-related SCA were higher than previously reported in other settings not related to exercise. These outcomes are likely related to a higher rate of bystander interventions in exertional or sport-specific settings. The findings of this review encourage layperson education in basic life support, the availability of AEDs in exercise facilities, and the development of emergency action plans to provide point-of-performance cardiac care in exertional settings. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,013
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: Revue systématique
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,345
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0130,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0090,005
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,041
Tête enseignante GPT0,324
Écart entre enseignants0,284 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEuropean Heart JournalMême sujetCardiovascular Effects of ExerciseTravaux en français237 207