Background: The present meta-analysis of clinical and simulation trials aimed to compare video-instructed dispatcher-assisted bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (V-DACPR) with conventional audio-instructed dispatcher-assisted bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (C-DACPR). Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Collaboration databases and Scopus from inception until June 10, 2021. The primary outcomes were the prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital discharge, and survival to hospital discharge with a good neurological outcome for clinical trials, and chest compression quality for simulation trials. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) indicated the pooled effect. The analyses were performed with the RevMan 5.4 and STATA 14 software. Results: Overall, 2 clinical and 8 simulation trials were included in this meta-analysis. In clinical trials, C-DACPR and V-DACPR were characterised by, respectively, 11.8% vs. 24.3% of prehospital ROSC (OR = 0.46; 95% CI: 0.30, 0.69; I 2 = 66%; p
CITATION STYLE
Bielski, K., Böttiger, B. W., Pruc, M., Gasecka, A., Sieminski, M., Jaguszewski, M. J., … Szarpak, L. (2022). Outcomes of audio-instructed and video-instructed dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of Medicine. Taylor and Francis Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2022.2032314
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.