Purpose There is a gap in time between the occurrence of a mass casualty incident (MCI) and the arrival of the first responders to the scene, which offers an opportunity for the public (immediate responders) to perform life-saving measures. The purpose of this study was to identify these measures and the public's willingness to conduct them. Method An extensive literature review was performed to identify the possible measures that can be undertaken by the public. A group of experts were asked to prioritize and rank the feasibility of performing the measures by the public. Finally, the public was asked whether they were willing to do the chosen measures before and after an appropriate education. Results Twenty different measures were identified and presented in a questionnaire as statements, which were prioritized and ranked by the expert group into four categories: what (1) should be done, (2) is good to know how, (3) is not necessary to know, and (4) should not be done. All statements were converted into understandable statements and were sent to the public. There were some differences and some agreements between the experts and the public regarding what an immediate responder should do. However, the willingness of the public to perform most of the measures was high and increased after being offered an appropriate education. Conclusion The use of immediate responders is a life-saving approach in MCIs and in situations when every minute counts and every human resource is an invaluable asset. Multiple steps, such as education, empowerment, and access, should be taken into consideration to enable bystanders to effectively help struggling survivors.

ImportanceSmartphone dispatch of volunteer responders to nearby out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) has emerged in several emergency medical services, but no randomized clinical trials have evaluated the effect on bystander use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs).ObjectiveTo evaluate if bystander AED use could be increased by smartphone-aided dispatch of lay volunteer responders with instructions to collect nearby AEDs compared with instructions to go directly to patients with OHCAs to start cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis randomized clinical trial assessed a system for smartphone dispatch of volunteer responders to individuals experiencing OHCAs that was triggered at emergency dispatch centers in response to suspected OHCAs and randomized 1:1. The study was conducted in 2 main Swedish regions: Stockholm and Västra Götaland between December 2018 and January 2020. At study start, there were 3123 AEDs in Stockholm and 3195 in Västra Götaland and 24 493 volunteer responders in Stockholm and 19 117 in Västra Götaland. All OHCAs in which the volunteer responder system was activated by dispatchers were included. Excluded were patients with no OHCAs, those with OHCAs not treated by the emergency medical services, and those with OHCAs witnessed by the emergency medical services.InterventionsVolunteer responders were alerted through the volunteer responder system smartphone application and received map-aided instructions to retrieve nearest available public AEDs on their way to the OHCAs. The control arm included volunteer responders who were instructed to go directly to the OHCAs to perform CPR.Main Outcomes and MeasuresOverall bystander AED attachment, including those attached by volunteer responders and lay volunteers who did not use the smartphone application.ResultsVolunteer responders were activated for 947 patients with OHCAs. Of those, 461 were randomized to the intervention group (median [IQR] age of patients, 73 [61-81] years; 295 male patients [65.3%]) and 486 were randomized to the control group (median [IQR] age of patients, 73 [63-82] years; 312 male patients [65.3%]). Primary outcome of AED attachment occurred in 61 patients (13.2%) in the intervention arm vs 46 patients (9.5%) in the control arm (difference, 3.8% [95% CI, −0.3% to 7.9%]; P = .08). The majority of AEDs were attached by lay volunteers who were not using the smartphone application (37 in intervention arm, 28 in control). There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes. Among the volunteer responders using the application, crossover was 11% and compliance to instructions was 31%. Volunteer responders attached 38% (41 of 107) of all AEDs and provided 45% (16 of 36) of all defibrillations and 43% (293 of 666) of all CPR.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, smartphone dispatch of volunteer responders to OHCAs to retrieve nearby AEDs vs instructions to directly perform CPR did not significantly increase volunteer AED use. High baseline AED attachement rate and crossover may explain why the difference was not significant.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02992873

Background There has been in increase in the use of systems for organizing lay responders for suspected out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) dispatch using smartphone-based technology. The purpose is to increase survival rates; however, such systems are dependent on people’s commitment to becoming a lay responder. Knowledge about the characteristics of such volunteers and their motivational factors is lacking. Therefore, we explored characteristics and quantified the underlying motivational factors for joining a smartphone-based cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) lay responder system. Methods In this descriptive cross-sectional study, 800 consecutively recruited lay responders in a smartphone-based mobile positioning first-responder system (SMS-lifesavers) were surveyed. Data on characteristics and motivational factors were collected, the latter through a modified version of the validated survey “Volunteer Motivation Inventory” (VMI). The statements in the VMI, ranked on a Likert scale (1–5), corresponded to(a) intrinsic (an inner belief of doing good for others) or (b) extrinsic (earning some kind of reward from the act) motivational factors. Results A total of 461 participants were included in the final analysis. Among respondents, 59% were women, 48% between 25 and 39 years of age, 37% worked within health care, and 66% had undergone post-secondary school. The most common way (44%) to learn about the lay responder system was from a CPR instructor. A majority (77%) had undergone CPR training at their workplace. In terms of motivation, where higher scores reflect greater importance to the participant, intrinsic factors scored highest, represented by the category values (mean 3.97) followed by extrinsic categories reciprocity (mean 3.88) and self-esteem (mean 3.22). Conclusion This study indicates that motivation to join a first responder system mainly depends on intrinsic factors, i.e. an inner belief of doing good, but there are also extrinsic factors, such as earning some kind of reward from the act, to consider. Focusing information campaigns on intrinsic factors may be the most important factor for successful recruitment. When implementing a smartphone-based lay responder system, CPR instructors, as a main information source to potential lay responders, as well as the workplace, are crucial for successful recruitment.

Background: Systems for smartphone dispatch of lay responders to perform cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and bring automated external defibrillators to out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) are advocated by recent international guidelines and emerging worldwide.Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the emotional responses, posttraumatic stress reactions and levels of wellbeing among smartphonealerted lay responders dispatched to suspected OHCAs. Methods: Lay responders were stratified by level of exposure: unexposed (Exp-0), tried to reach (Exp-1), and reached the suspected OHCA (Exp-2). Participants rated their emotional responses online, at 90 minutes and at 4-6 weeks after an incident. Level of emotional response was measured in two dimensions of core aect: "alertness" -from deactivation to activation, and "pleasantness" -from unpleasant to pleasant. At 4-6 weeks, WHO wellbeing index and level of posttraumatic stress (PTSD) were also rated. Results: Altogether, 915 (28%) unexposed and 1471 (64%) exposed responders completed the survey. Alertness was elevated in the exposed groups: Exp-0: 6.7 vs. Exp-1: 7.3 and Exp-2: 7.5, (p < 0.001) and pleasantness was highest in the unexposed group: 6.5, vs. Exp-1: 6.3, and Exp-2: 6.1, (p < 0.001). Mean scores for PTSD at follow-up was below clinical cut-o, Exp-0: 9.9, Exp-1: 8.9 and Exp-2: 8.8 (p = 0.065). Wellbeing index showed no dierences, Exp-0: 78.0, Exp-1: 78.5 and Exp-2: 79.9 (p = 0.596). Conclusion: Smartphone dispatched lay responders rated the experience as high-energy and mainly positive. No harm to the lay responders was seen. The exposed groups had low posttraumatic stress scores and high-level general wellbeing at follow-up.