A systematic review of interventions for resuscitation following drowning

Joost Bierens; Janet Bray; International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation BLS/AED Task Force; Cristian Abelairas-Gomez; Roberto Barcala-Furelos; Stephen Beerman; Andreas Claesson; Cody Dunne; Tatsuma Fukuda; Muralidharan Jayashree; Anthony T Lagina; Lei Li; Tom Mecrow; Patrick Morgan; Andrew Schmidt; Jeroen Seesink; Justin Sempsrott; David Szpilman; Ogilvie Thom; Joshua Tobin; Jonathon Webber; Samantha Johnson; Gavin D. Perkins

doi:10.1016/j.resplu.2023.100406

A systematic review of interventions for resuscitation following drowning

Joost Bierens, Janet Bray, International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation BLS/AED Task Force, Cristian Abelairas-Gomez, Roberto Barcala-Furelos, Stephen Beerman, Andreas Claesson, Cody Dunne, Tatsuma Fukuda, Muralidharan Jayashree, Anthony T Lagina, Lei Li, Tom Mecrow, Patrick Morgan, Andrew Schmidt, Jeroen Seesink, Justin Sempsrott, David Szpilman, Ogilvie Thom, Joshua TobinJonathon Webber, Samantha Johnson, Gavin D. Perkins^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Anesthesiology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › Academic › peer-review

12 Citations (Scopus)

32 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objectives: The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, in collaboration with drowning researchers from around the world, aimed to review the evidence addressing seven key resuscitation interventions: 1) immediate versus delayed resuscitation; (2) compression first versus ventilation first strategy; (3) compression-only CPR versus standard CPR (compressions and ventilations); (4) ventilation with and without equipment; (5) oxygen administration prior to hospital arrival; (6) automated external defibrillation first versus cardiopulmonary resuscitation first strategy; (7) public access defibrillation programmes. Methods: The review included studies relating to adults and children who had sustained a cardiac arrest following drowning with control groups and reported patient outcomes. Searches were run from database inception through to April 2023. The following databases were searched Ovid MEDLINE, Pre-Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool and the certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. The findings are reported as a narrative synthesis. Results: Three studies were included for two of the seven interventions (2,451 patients). No randomised controlled trials were identified. A retrospective observational study reported in-water resuscitation with rescue breaths improved patient outcomes compared to delayed resuscitation on land (n = 46 patients, very low certainty of evidence). The two observational studies (n = 2,405 patients), comparing compression-only with standard resuscitation, reported no difference for most outcomes. A statistically higher rate of survival to hospital discharge was reported for the standard resuscitation group in one of these studies (29.7% versus 18.1%, adjusted odds ratio 1.54 (95% confidence interval 1.01–2.36) (very low certainty of evidence). Conclusion: The key finding of this systematic review is the paucity of evidence, with control groups, to inform treatment guidelines for resuscitation in drowning.

Original language	English
Article number	100406
Journal	Resuscitation Plus
Volume	14
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resplu.2023.100406
Publication status	Published - Jun 2023

Bibliographical note

Funding: International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation.

Publisher Copyright: © 2023 The Author(s)

Access to Document

10.1016/j.resplu.2023.100406Licence: CC BY-NC-ND

1-s2.0-S2666520423000498-mainFinal published version, 347 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

Bierens, J., Bray, J., International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation BLS/AED Task Force, Abelairas-Gomez, C., Barcala-Furelos, R., Beerman, S., Claesson, A., Dunne, C., Fukuda, T., Jayashree, M., T Lagina, A., Li, L., Mecrow, T., Morgan, P., Schmidt, A., Seesink, J., Sempsrott, J., Szpilman, D., Thom, O., ... Perkins, G. D. (2023). A systematic review of interventions for resuscitation following drowning. Resuscitation Plus, 14, Article 100406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resplu.2023.100406

@article{74cca23c259a4c3dac0cc798036b7233,

title = "A systematic review of interventions for resuscitation following drowning",

abstract = "Objectives: The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, in collaboration with drowning researchers from around the world, aimed to review the evidence addressing seven key resuscitation interventions: 1) immediate versus delayed resuscitation; (2) compression first versus ventilation first strategy; (3) compression-only CPR versus standard CPR (compressions and ventilations); (4) ventilation with and without equipment; (5) oxygen administration prior to hospital arrival; (6) automated external defibrillation first versus cardiopulmonary resuscitation first strategy; (7) public access defibrillation programmes. Methods: The review included studies relating to adults and children who had sustained a cardiac arrest following drowning with control groups and reported patient outcomes. Searches were run from database inception through to April 2023. The following databases were searched Ovid MEDLINE, Pre-Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool and the certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. The findings are reported as a narrative synthesis. Results: Three studies were included for two of the seven interventions (2,451 patients). No randomised controlled trials were identified. A retrospective observational study reported in-water resuscitation with rescue breaths improved patient outcomes compared to delayed resuscitation on land (n = 46 patients, very low certainty of evidence). The two observational studies (n = 2,405 patients), comparing compression-only with standard resuscitation, reported no difference for most outcomes. A statistically higher rate of survival to hospital discharge was reported for the standard resuscitation group in one of these studies (29.7% versus 18.1%, adjusted odds ratio 1.54 (95% confidence interval 1.01–2.36) (very low certainty of evidence). Conclusion: The key finding of this systematic review is the paucity of evidence, with control groups, to inform treatment guidelines for resuscitation in drowning.",

author = "Joost Bierens and Janet Bray and {International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation BLS/AED Task Force} and Cristian Abelairas-Gomez and Roberto Barcala-Furelos and Stephen Beerman and Andreas Claesson and Cody Dunne and Tatsuma Fukuda and Muralidharan Jayashree and {T Lagina}, Anthony and Lei Li and Tom Mecrow and Patrick Morgan and Andrew Schmidt and Jeroen Seesink and Justin Sempsrott and David Szpilman and Ogilvie Thom and Joshua Tobin and Jonathon Webber and Samantha Johnson and Perkins, {Gavin D.}",

note = "Funding: International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023 The Author(s)",

year = "2023",

month = jun,

doi = "10.1016/j.resplu.2023.100406",

language = "English",

volume = "14",

journal = "Resuscitation Plus",

issn = "2666-5204",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Bierens, J, Bray, J, International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation BLS/AED Task Force, Abelairas-Gomez, C, Barcala-Furelos, R, Beerman, S, Claesson, A, Dunne, C, Fukuda, T, Jayashree, M, T Lagina, A, Li, L, Mecrow, T, Morgan, P, Schmidt, A, Seesink, J, Sempsrott, J, Szpilman, D, Thom, O, Tobin, J, Webber, J, Johnson, S & Perkins, GD 2023, 'A systematic review of interventions for resuscitation following drowning', Resuscitation Plus, vol. 14, 100406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resplu.2023.100406

TY - JOUR

T1 - A systematic review of interventions for resuscitation following drowning

AU - Bierens, Joost

AU - Bray, Janet

AU - International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation BLS/AED Task Force

AU - Abelairas-Gomez, Cristian

AU - Barcala-Furelos, Roberto

AU - Beerman, Stephen

AU - Claesson, Andreas

AU - Dunne, Cody

AU - Fukuda, Tatsuma

AU - Jayashree, Muralidharan

AU - T Lagina, Anthony

AU - Li, Lei

AU - Mecrow, Tom

AU - Morgan, Patrick

AU - Schmidt, Andrew

AU - Seesink, Jeroen

AU - Sempsrott, Justin

AU - Szpilman, David

AU - Thom, Ogilvie

AU - Tobin, Joshua

AU - Webber, Jonathon

AU - Johnson, Samantha

AU - Perkins, Gavin D.

PY - 2023/6

Y1 - 2023/6

N2 - Objectives: The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, in collaboration with drowning researchers from around the world, aimed to review the evidence addressing seven key resuscitation interventions: 1) immediate versus delayed resuscitation; (2) compression first versus ventilation first strategy; (3) compression-only CPR versus standard CPR (compressions and ventilations); (4) ventilation with and without equipment; (5) oxygen administration prior to hospital arrival; (6) automated external defibrillation first versus cardiopulmonary resuscitation first strategy; (7) public access defibrillation programmes. Methods: The review included studies relating to adults and children who had sustained a cardiac arrest following drowning with control groups and reported patient outcomes. Searches were run from database inception through to April 2023. The following databases were searched Ovid MEDLINE, Pre-Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool and the certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. The findings are reported as a narrative synthesis. Results: Three studies were included for two of the seven interventions (2,451 patients). No randomised controlled trials were identified. A retrospective observational study reported in-water resuscitation with rescue breaths improved patient outcomes compared to delayed resuscitation on land (n = 46 patients, very low certainty of evidence). The two observational studies (n = 2,405 patients), comparing compression-only with standard resuscitation, reported no difference for most outcomes. A statistically higher rate of survival to hospital discharge was reported for the standard resuscitation group in one of these studies (29.7% versus 18.1%, adjusted odds ratio 1.54 (95% confidence interval 1.01–2.36) (very low certainty of evidence). Conclusion: The key finding of this systematic review is the paucity of evidence, with control groups, to inform treatment guidelines for resuscitation in drowning.

AB - Objectives: The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, in collaboration with drowning researchers from around the world, aimed to review the evidence addressing seven key resuscitation interventions: 1) immediate versus delayed resuscitation; (2) compression first versus ventilation first strategy; (3) compression-only CPR versus standard CPR (compressions and ventilations); (4) ventilation with and without equipment; (5) oxygen administration prior to hospital arrival; (6) automated external defibrillation first versus cardiopulmonary resuscitation first strategy; (7) public access defibrillation programmes. Methods: The review included studies relating to adults and children who had sustained a cardiac arrest following drowning with control groups and reported patient outcomes. Searches were run from database inception through to April 2023. The following databases were searched Ovid MEDLINE, Pre-Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool and the certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. The findings are reported as a narrative synthesis. Results: Three studies were included for two of the seven interventions (2,451 patients). No randomised controlled trials were identified. A retrospective observational study reported in-water resuscitation with rescue breaths improved patient outcomes compared to delayed resuscitation on land (n = 46 patients, very low certainty of evidence). The two observational studies (n = 2,405 patients), comparing compression-only with standard resuscitation, reported no difference for most outcomes. A statistically higher rate of survival to hospital discharge was reported for the standard resuscitation group in one of these studies (29.7% versus 18.1%, adjusted odds ratio 1.54 (95% confidence interval 1.01–2.36) (very low certainty of evidence). Conclusion: The key finding of this systematic review is the paucity of evidence, with control groups, to inform treatment guidelines for resuscitation in drowning.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85161508205&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.resplu.2023.100406

DO - 10.1016/j.resplu.2023.100406

M3 - Review article

C2 - 37424769

AN - SCOPUS:85161508205

SN - 2666-5204

VL - 14

JO - Resuscitation Plus

JF - Resuscitation Plus

M1 - 100406

ER -

A systematic review of interventions for resuscitation following drowning

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this