Chest compression-only CPR by lay rescuers and survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Bentley J. Bobrow, Daniel W. Spaite, Robert A. Berg, Uwe Stolz, Arthur B. Sanders, Karl B. Kern, Tyler F. Vadeboncoeur, Lani L. Clark, John V. Gallagher, J. Stephan Stapczynski, Frank LoVecchio, Terry J. Mullins, Will O. Humble, Gordon A. Ewy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

376 Scopus citations


Context: Chest compression-only bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) may be as effective as conventional CPR with rescue breathing for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Objective: To investigate the survival of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest using compression-only CPR (COCPR) compared with conventional CPR. Design, Setting, and Patients: A 5-year prospective observational cohort study of survival in patients at least 18 years old with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2009, in Arizona. The relationship between layperson bystander CPR and survival to hospital discharge was evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Main Outcome Measure: Survival to hospital discharge. Results: Among 5272 adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of cardiac etiology not observed by responding emergency medical personnel, 779 were excluded because bystander CPR was provided by a health care professional or the arrest occurred in a medical facility. A total of 4415 met all inclusion criteria for analysis, including 2900 who received no bystander CPR, 666 who received conventional CPR, and 849 who received COCPR. Rates of survival to hospital discharge were 5.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.4%-6.0%) for the no bystander CPR group, 7.8% (95% CI, 5.8%-9.8%) for conventional CPR, and 13.3% (95% CI, 11.0%-15.6%) for COCPR. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for survival for conventional CPR vs no CPR was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.69-1.43), for COCPR vs no CPR, 1.59 (95% CI, 1.18-2.13), and for COCPR vs conventional CPR, 1.60 (95% CI, 1.08-2.35). From 2005 to 2009, lay rescuer CPR increased from 28.2% (95% CI, 24.6%-31.8%) to 39.9% (95% CI, 36.8%-42.9%; P < .001); the proportion of CPR that was COCPR increased from 19.6% (95% CI, 13.6%-25.7%) to 75.9% (95% CI, 71.7%-80.1%; P < .001). Overall survival increased from 3.7% (95% CI, 2.2%-5.2%) to 9.8% (95% CI, 8.0%-11.6%; P < .001). Conclusion: Among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, layperson compression-only CPR was associated with increased survival compared with conventional CPR and no bystander CPR in this setting with public endorsement of chest compression-only CPR.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1447-1454
Number of pages8
JournalJAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association
Issue number13
StatePublished - Oct 6 2010

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Medicine


Dive into the research topics of 'Chest compression-only CPR by lay rescuers and survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this