Annam Pervez Sheikh, Anne Juul Grabmayr, Julie Samsøe Kjølbye, Annette Kjær Ersbøll, Carolina Malta Hansen, Fredrik Folke
{"title":"丹麦火车站院外心脏骤停的发生率和后果。","authors":"Annam Pervez Sheikh, Anne Juul Grabmayr, Julie Samsøe Kjølbye, Annette Kjær Ersbøll, Carolina Malta Hansen, Fredrik Folke","doi":"10.1161/JAHA.124.035733","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Following international guidelines, communities have deployed automated external defibrillators at train stations without substantive evidence.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>We geocoded public out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) (2016-2020), automated external defibrillators, and train stations. The stations were divided into the following groups according to passenger flow: 1 (0-499), 2 (500-4999), 3 (5000-9999), and 4 (>10 000) passengers per day. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated using Poisson regression of rates, and odds ratios (ORs) were analyzed through logistic regression. OHCAs at train stations accounted for 102 (2.3%) of 4467 public OHCAs. The incidence rate (IR) and RR for OHCAs were for group 1: IR, 0.02 OHCA per station per year, RR, 1.0 (reference); group 2: IR, 0.07, RR, 4.1 (95% CI, 2.3-7.3); group 3: IR, 0.25, RR, 12.7 (95% CI, 6.2-25.9); and group 4: IR, 0.34, RR, 16.3 (95% CI, 8.6-30.9). Compared with other public OHCAs, OHCAs at train stations were just as likely to receive bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (OR, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.60-2.12]). However, they had higher odds of bystander defibrillation (OR, 1.66 [95% CI, 1.06-2.58]), were more likely to achieve return of spontaneous circulation (OR, 1.88 [95% CI, 1.24-2.85]), and survive 30 days (OR, 2.37 [95% CI, 1.57-3.59]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The incidence of OHCAs at train stations was associated with passenger flow, with the busiest stations having a 16-fold higher risk of OHCAs than the lowest. OHCAs at train stations had better outcomes compared with other public OHCAs.</p>","PeriodicalId":54370,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Heart Association","volume":" ","pages":"e035733"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incidence and Outcomes After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest at Train Stations in Denmark.\",\"authors\":\"Annam Pervez Sheikh, Anne Juul Grabmayr, Julie Samsøe Kjølbye, Annette Kjær Ersbøll, Carolina Malta Hansen, Fredrik Folke\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/JAHA.124.035733\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Following international guidelines, communities have deployed automated external defibrillators at train stations without substantive evidence.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>We geocoded public out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) (2016-2020), automated external defibrillators, and train stations. The stations were divided into the following groups according to passenger flow: 1 (0-499), 2 (500-4999), 3 (5000-9999), and 4 (>10 000) passengers per day. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated using Poisson regression of rates, and odds ratios (ORs) were analyzed through logistic regression. OHCAs at train stations accounted for 102 (2.3%) of 4467 public OHCAs. The incidence rate (IR) and RR for OHCAs were for group 1: IR, 0.02 OHCA per station per year, RR, 1.0 (reference); group 2: IR, 0.07, RR, 4.1 (95% CI, 2.3-7.3); group 3: IR, 0.25, RR, 12.7 (95% CI, 6.2-25.9); and group 4: IR, 0.34, RR, 16.3 (95% CI, 8.6-30.9). Compared with other public OHCAs, OHCAs at train stations were just as likely to receive bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (OR, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.60-2.12]). However, they had higher odds of bystander defibrillation (OR, 1.66 [95% CI, 1.06-2.58]), were more likely to achieve return of spontaneous circulation (OR, 1.88 [95% CI, 1.24-2.85]), and survive 30 days (OR, 2.37 [95% CI, 1.57-3.59]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The incidence of OHCAs at train stations was associated with passenger flow, with the busiest stations having a 16-fold higher risk of OHCAs than the lowest. OHCAs at train stations had better outcomes compared with other public OHCAs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54370,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Heart Association\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e035733\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Heart Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.124.035733\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Heart Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.124.035733","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Incidence and Outcomes After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest at Train Stations in Denmark.
Background: Following international guidelines, communities have deployed automated external defibrillators at train stations without substantive evidence.
Methods and results: We geocoded public out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) (2016-2020), automated external defibrillators, and train stations. The stations were divided into the following groups according to passenger flow: 1 (0-499), 2 (500-4999), 3 (5000-9999), and 4 (>10 000) passengers per day. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated using Poisson regression of rates, and odds ratios (ORs) were analyzed through logistic regression. OHCAs at train stations accounted for 102 (2.3%) of 4467 public OHCAs. The incidence rate (IR) and RR for OHCAs were for group 1: IR, 0.02 OHCA per station per year, RR, 1.0 (reference); group 2: IR, 0.07, RR, 4.1 (95% CI, 2.3-7.3); group 3: IR, 0.25, RR, 12.7 (95% CI, 6.2-25.9); and group 4: IR, 0.34, RR, 16.3 (95% CI, 8.6-30.9). Compared with other public OHCAs, OHCAs at train stations were just as likely to receive bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (OR, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.60-2.12]). However, they had higher odds of bystander defibrillation (OR, 1.66 [95% CI, 1.06-2.58]), were more likely to achieve return of spontaneous circulation (OR, 1.88 [95% CI, 1.24-2.85]), and survive 30 days (OR, 2.37 [95% CI, 1.57-3.59]).
Conclusions: The incidence of OHCAs at train stations was associated with passenger flow, with the busiest stations having a 16-fold higher risk of OHCAs than the lowest. OHCAs at train stations had better outcomes compared with other public OHCAs.
期刊介绍:
As an Open Access journal, JAHA - Journal of the American Heart Association is rapidly and freely available, accelerating the translation of strong science into effective practice.
JAHA is an authoritative, peer-reviewed Open Access journal focusing on cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease. JAHA provides a global forum for basic and clinical research and timely reviews on cardiovascular disease and stroke. As an Open Access journal, its content is free on publication to read, download, and share, accelerating the translation of strong science into effective practice.