Bystander CPR Technique and Outcomes for Cardiac Arrest With and Without Opioid Toxicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Previous studies support bystander provision of chest compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CC-CPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). However, it is unknown whether OHCA secondary to opioid toxicity may benefit from chest compression plus ventilation CPR (CCV-CPR). Objective: To examine the association between bystander CPR technique and outcomes among both opioid-associated OHCA (OA-OHCA) and otherwise undifferentiated OHCA. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study (performed from August 1, 2023, to December 31, 2024) analyzed cases of adult emergency medical services-treated OHCA that occurred from December 1, 2014, to March 31, 2020, as identified through the British Columbia Cardiac Arrest Registry. Exposures: Cases were classified as OA-OHCA based on positive postmortem toxicologic investigations, death certificates, or opioid-specific hospital-based diagnoses. All other cases were classified as undifferentiated OHCA. Main Outcomes and Measures: Favorable neurologic outcome at hospital discharge (cerebral performance category ≤2). A multivariable Utstein-adjusted logistic regression model of complete cases was used to assess the association between bystander CPR technique (CC-CPR [reference] vs both CCV-CPR and no CPR individually) with outcomes. An interaction term between the OA-OHCA and bystander CPR technique was used to estimate associations among OA-OHCA and undifferentiated OHCA cases separately. Results: The study included 10 923 OHCAs. After removing 24 cases only treated with ventilatory support, there were 1343 OA-OHCAs (median [IQR] patient age, 40 [31-50] years; 1015 [76%] male) and 9556 undifferentiated OHCAs (median [IQR] patient age, 70 [58-81] years; 6636 (69%) male). In the OA-OHCA group, bystander CCV-CPR was associated with an increased odds of a favorable neurologic outcome (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.85; 95% CI, 1.21-6.75) when compared with CC-CPR. No association was detected with favorable neurologic outcome (AOR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.82-2.82) when no CPR was compared with CC-CPR. Among undifferentiated OHCAs, no association was detected with a favorable neurologic outcome (AOR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.80-1.67) when CCV-CPR was compared with CC-CPR. No CPR was associated with a decreased odds of a favorable neurologic outcome (AOR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55-0.87) when compared with CC-CPR. The interaction term was statistically significant (P for interaction = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of OHCA, bystander CCV-CPR (compared with CC-CPR) was associated with improved outcomes in opioid-associated OHCA; however, this association was not observed among undifferentiated cardiac arrests. These results suggest that the optimal bystander CPR technique for OA-OHCA and undifferentiated OHCA may differ and that ventilations may improve outcomes in OA-OHCA resuscitation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".