Resuscitation Plus (Jun 2023)

A systematic review of interventions for resuscitation following drowning

  • Joost Bierens,
  • Janet Bray,
  • 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

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 14
p. 100406

Abstract

Read online

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.

Keywords