The PulsePoint Respond mobile device application to crowdsource basic life support for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: Challenges for optimal implementation

Brooks, Steven C.; Simmons, Graydon; Worthington, Heather; Bobrow, Bentley J.; Morrison, Laurie J.

doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.09.392

Cited by 131 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(14 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As such, these systems have not received much scientific attention. During recent attempts to implement the PulsePoint system in several Canadian jurisdictions because of concerns over protecting privacy and uncertainty about public opinion or potential backlash [7]. Our work demonstrates that public opinion strongly supports the implementation of PulsePoint-type apps and that many members of the public are willing to become responders, if given the opportunity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 54%

See 1 more Smart Citation

North American Public Opinion Survey on the Acceptability of Crowdsourcing Basic Life Support for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest With the PulsePoint Mobile Phone App

Dainty¹,

Vaid²,

Brooks³

2017

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe PulsePoint Respond app is a novel system that can be implemented in emergency dispatch centers to crowdsource basic life support (BLS) for patients with cardiac arrest and facilitate bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillator use while first responders are en route.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to conduct a North American survey to evaluate the public perception of the above-mentioned strategy, including acceptability and willingness to respond to alerts.MethodsWe designed a Web-based survey administered by IPSOS Reid, an established external polling vendor. Sampling was designed to ensure broad representation using recent census statistics.ResultsA total of 2415 survey responses were analyzed (1106 from Canada and 1309 from the United States). It was found that 98.37% (1088/1106) of Canadians and 96% (1259/1309) of Americans had no objections to PulsePoint being implemented in their community; 84.27% (932/1106) of Canadians and 55.61% (728/1309) of Americans said they would download the app to become a potential responder to cardiac arrest, respectively. Among Canadians, those who said they were likely to download PulsePoint were also more likely to have ever had CPR training (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.2-2.4; P=.002); however, this was not true of American respondents (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.79-1.3; P=.88). When asked to imagine themselves as a cardiac arrest victim, 95.39% (1055/1106) of Canadians and 92.44% (1210/1309) of Americans had no objections to receiving crowdsourced help in a public setting; 88.79% (982/1106) of Canadians and 84.87% (1111/1309) of Americans also had no objections to receiving help in a private setting, respectively. The most common concern identified with respect to PulsePoint implementation was a responder’s lack of ability, training, or access to proper equipment in a public setting.ConclusionsThe North American public finds the concept of crowdsourcing BLS for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest to be acceptable. It demonstrates willingness to respond to PulsePoint CPR notifications and to accept help from others alerted by the app if they themselves suffered a cardiac arrest.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 54%

“…Although the majority of PulsePoint volunteers are off-duty health care providers [7], anyone in the community can download the app and become a PulsePoint responder. When new users download the app, they are asked to declare that they are CPR trained and willing to respond in an emergency.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

North American Public Opinion Survey on the Acceptability of Crowdsourcing Basic Life Support for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest With the PulsePoint Mobile Phone App

Dainty¹,

Vaid²,

Brooks³

2017

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, appropriate initiatives should be adopted to reduce EMS response time 31, 32, 33. Such initiatives may include the reconfiguration of emergency call systems to enable rapid arrival of lay‐trained volunteers before the arrival of EMS personnel at the scene, or the implementation of educational programs to improve performance of high‐quality bystander CPR with defibrillation 7, 30, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship Between Emergency Medical Services Response Time and Bystander Intervention in Patients With Out‐of‐Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Goto

Funada

Goto

2018

JAHA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe response time of emergency medical services (EMS) is an important determinant of survival after out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest. We sought to identify upper limits of EMS response times and bystander interventions associated with neurologically intact survival.Methods and ResultsWe analyzed the records of 553 426 patients with out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest in a Japanese registry between 2010 and 2014. The primary study end point was 1‐month neurologically intact survival (Cerebral Performance Category scale 1 or 2). Increased EMS response time was associated with significantly decreased adjusted odds of 1‐month neurologically intact survival (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for each 1‐minute increase, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89–0.90), although this relationship was modified by bystander interventions. The bystander interventions and the ranges of EMS response times that were associated with increased adjusted 1‐month neurologically intact survival were as follows: bystander defibrillation, from ≤2 minutes (aOR, 3.10 [95% CI, 1.25–7.31]) to 13 minutes (aOR, 5.55 [95% CI, 2.66–11.2]); bystander conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation, from 3 minutes (aOR 1.48 [95% CI, 1.02–2.12]) to 11 minutes (aOR 2.41 [95% CI, 1.61–3.56]); and bystander chest‐compression‐only cardiopulmonary resuscitation, from ≤2 minutes (aOR 1.57 [95% CI, 1.01–2.25]) to 11 minutes (aOR 1.92 [95% CI, 1.45–2.56]). However, the increase in neurologically intact survival of those receiving bystander interventions became statistically insignificant compared with no bystander interventions when the EMS response time was outside these ranges.ConclusionsThe upper limits of the EMS response times associated with improved 1‐month neurologically intact survival were 13 minutes when bystanders provided defibrillation (typically with cardiopulmonary resuscitation) and 11 minutes when bystanders provided cardiopulmonary resuscitation without defibrillation.

show abstract

“…The impact of app-based digital technology on bystander defibrillation for OHCA was identified as a key research priority by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) [14] [15]. App-based volunteer first-responder systems such as GoodSAM [16], Pulsepoint [17] and FirstAED [18] integrate with EMS and notify registered volunteers via smartphone if they are within a certain distance of an OHCA. The pool of bystanders willing to intervene can be increased and, in theory, this can improve the likelihood that a nearby AED is retrieved and attached to an OHCA victim.…”

Section: Capability and Motivation (Knowledge Education And Persuasion)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving bystander defibrillation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: Capability, opportunity and motivation

Smith

Perkins

2018

Resuscitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The PulsePoint Respond mobile device application to crowdsource basic life support for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: Challenges for optimal implementation

Cited by 131 publications

References 15 publications

North American Public Opinion Survey on the Acceptability of Crowdsourcing Basic Life Support for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest With the PulsePoint Mobile Phone App

North American Public Opinion Survey on the Acceptability of Crowdsourcing Basic Life Support for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest With the PulsePoint Mobile Phone App

Relationship Between Emergency Medical Services Response Time and Bystander Intervention in Patients With Out‐of‐Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Improving bystander defibrillation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: Capability, opportunity and motivation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About