Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a major global health challenge, characterized by poor survival outcomes worldwide. Resource-limited settings are burdened with suboptimal emergency response and worse outcomes than high-resource areas. Engaging the community in the response to OHCA has the potential to improve outcomes, although an overview of community interventions in resource-limited settings has not been provided.
UNASSIGNED: This review evaluated the scope of community-based OHCA interventions in resource-limited settings.
UNASSIGNED: Literature searches in electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials) and grey literature sources were performed. Abstract screening, full-text review, and data extraction of eligible studies were conducted independently by two reviewers. The PCC (Population, Concept, and Context) framework was used to assess study eligibility. Studies that evaluated community-based interventions for laypeople (Population), targeting emergency response activation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), or automated external defibrillator (AED) use (Concept) in resource-limited settings (Context) were included. Resource-limited settings were identified by financial pressures (low-income or lower-middle-income country, according to World Bank data on year of publication) or geographical factors (setting described using keywords indicative of geographical remoteness in upper-middle-income or high-income country).
UNASSIGNED: Among 14,810 records identified from literature searches, 60 studies from 28 unique countries were included in this review. Studies were conducted in high-income (n = 35), upper-middle-income (n = 2), lower-middle-income (n = 22), and low-income countries (n = 1). Community interventions included bystander CPR and/or AED training (n = 34), community responder programs (n = 8), drone-delivered AED networks (n = 6), dispatcher-assisted CPR programs (n = 4), regional resuscitation campaigns (n = 3), public access defibrillation programs (n = 3), and crowdsourcing technologies (n = 2). CPR and/or AED training were the only interventions evaluated in low-income, lower-middle-income, and upper-middle-income countries.
UNASSIGNED: Interventions aimed at improving the community response to OHCA in resource-limited settings differ globally. There is a lack of reported studies from low-income countries and certain continental regions, including South America, Africa, and Oceania. Evaluation of interventions other than CPR and/or AED training in low- and middle-income countries is needed to guide community emergency planning and health policies.
UNASSIGNED: This review evaluated the scope of community-based OHCA interventions in resource-limited settings.
UNASSIGNED: Literature searches in electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials) and grey literature sources were performed. Abstract screening, full-text review, and data extraction of eligible studies were conducted independently by two reviewers. The PCC (Population, Concept, and Context) framework was used to assess study eligibility. Studies that evaluated community-based interventions for laypeople (Population), targeting emergency response activation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), or automated external defibrillator (AED) use (Concept) in resource-limited settings (Context) were included. Resource-limited settings were identified by financial pressures (low-income or lower-middle-income country, according to World Bank data on year of publication) or geographical factors (setting described using keywords indicative of geographical remoteness in upper-middle-income or high-income country).
UNASSIGNED: Among 14,810 records identified from literature searches, 60 studies from 28 unique countries were included in this review. Studies were conducted in high-income (n = 35), upper-middle-income (n = 2), lower-middle-income (n = 22), and low-income countries (n = 1). Community interventions included bystander CPR and/or AED training (n = 34), community responder programs (n = 8), drone-delivered AED networks (n = 6), dispatcher-assisted CPR programs (n = 4), regional resuscitation campaigns (n = 3), public access defibrillation programs (n = 3), and crowdsourcing technologies (n = 2). CPR and/or AED training were the only interventions evaluated in low-income, lower-middle-income, and upper-middle-income countries.
UNASSIGNED: Interventions aimed at improving the community response to OHCA in resource-limited settings differ globally. There is a lack of reported studies from low-income countries and certain continental regions, including South America, Africa, and Oceania. Evaluation of interventions other than CPR and/or AED training in low- and middle-income countries is needed to guide community emergency planning and health policies.
摘要：
背景：院外心脏骤停（OHCA）是一项重大的全球卫生挑战，以全球生存结果不佳为特征。资源有限的环境承受着次优的紧急响应和比高资源地区更差的结果。让社区参与对OHCA的反应有可能改善结果，尽管尚未提供资源有限环境中社区干预措施的概述。目的：本综述评估了在资源有限的环境中基于社区的OHCA干预措施的范围。方法：在电子数据库中进行文献检索(MEDLINE，EMBASE,全球卫生,CINAHL,进行了Cochrane中央对照临床试验注册）和灰色文献来源。抽象筛选,全文回顾,合格研究的数据提取由两名评审员独立进行.PCC（人口，概念,和上下文)框架用于评估研究资格。评估外行人社区干预措施的研究(人口)，针对紧急响应激活，心肺复苏术(CPR),或自动体外除颤器（AED）的使用（概念）在资源有限的设置（上下文）被包括在内。资源有限的环境是由财政压力确定的(低收入或中低收入国家，根据世界银行发布年份的数据）或地理因素（使用表示中上收入或高收入国家地理偏远的关键字描述的设置）。结果：在从文献检索中确定的14,810条记录中，来自28个独特国家的60项研究被纳入本综述。研究是在高收入人群中进行的(n=35)，中上收入（n=2），中低收入（n=22），低收入国家（n=1）。社区干预措施包括旁观者CPR和/或AED培训(n=34)，社区响应者计划(n=8)，无人机发射的AED网络(n=6)，调度员辅助心肺复苏计划(n=4)，区域复苏运动(n=3)，公共接入除颤程序(n=3)，和众包技术(n=2)。CPR和/或AED培训是低收入人群评估的唯一干预措施，中低收入，和中高收入国家。结论：旨在改善资源有限环境中社区对OHCA的反应的干预措施在全球范围内有所不同。低收入国家和某些大陆地区缺乏报告研究，包括南美,非洲,和大洋洲。需要评估低收入和中等收入国家除CPR和/或AED培训以外的干预措施，以指导社区应急计划和卫生政策。
