MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

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

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

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCINAHLMEDLINEObservational studyCardiopulmonary resuscitationSudden cardiac arrestPopulationSudden cardiac deathSystematic reviewCochrane LibraryGrey literaturePsychological interventionPhysical therapyEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicineMeta-analysisResuscitationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from 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.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.345
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.005
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicCardiovascular Effects of ExerciseFrench-language works237,207