Barriers to recognition of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest during emergency medical calls: a qualitative inductive thematic analysis

Table 3 Characteristics for emergency calls concerning not recognised OHCA

Patient no.	Patient age	Patient gender	Caller's relation to patient	Caller's distance to patient	Response	Emergency physician treatment
9	32	Male	Mother	With patient	A3	Resuscitation success
10	49	Female	Spouse	With patient	A2	Resuscitation failed
11	59	Female	Neighbour	With patient	A2	Resuscitation failed
12	68	Male	Nursing home nurse^a	With patient	A1	Resuscitation failed
13	71	Male	Daughter in law	Not at scene	A3	Resuscitation failed
14	74	Male	Spouse	With patient	A1	Resuscitation failed
15	77	Female	General Practitioner^a	Not at scene	A3	No treatment
16	80	Female	Spouse	With patient	A1	Resuscitation failed
17	80	Male	Son in law	With patient	A1	Resuscitation failed
18	83	Female	Daughter	With patient	A3	No treatment
19	88	Female	Nursing home staff^a	Near patient	A2	No treatment
20	94	Male	Spouse	Near patient	B2	No treatment
21	98	Male	Nursing home staff^a	With patient	A1	Resuscitation failed

Patients: 6 male, 7 female, median age 74 years (32-98); Caller: 4 healthcare professionals^a and 9 non-healthcare professionals. With patient: The caller can see the patient. Near patient: The caller cannot see the patient, but communicate with a person together with the patient. Not at scene: Caller in different location from the patient. Resuscitation success: CPR successful. Resuscitation failed: CPR attempted, but unsuccessful. No treatment: CPR not attempted. ^aIndicates healthcare professional. A1 = Mobile Critical Care Unit and ambulance staffed with paramedic, A2 = Ambulance staffed with a paramedic, A3 = Basic life support ambulance, B2 = Ambulance staffed with a paramedic, no lights and siren

ISSN: 1757-7241