Table 6 Risk factors identified in the included literature
Reference | Risk/Protective Factor | Specific detail | Measure of significance (i.e. relative risk, statistical significance etc.) |
|---|---|---|---|
Çaylan et al. (2021) [27] | Gender | Male | Males significantly more likely to drown than females (p = 0.039) |
Area | Areas away from the home | Drowning more likely in areas away from the home as compared home or its close vicinity (p = 0.001) | |
Season | Winter* | Seasonal differences in drowning with lower risk in Winter (p < 0.001) | |
Güzel et al. (2013) [31] | Gender | Male | The drowning rate was statistically higher in males (42 patients, 76.4%) than females (13 patients, 23.6%) (p < 0.001) |
Işın et al. (2020) [7] | Gender | Male | Males were four-times more at risk (RR:3.98 CI: 3.66–4.32) than females |
Age | 15–17 years | Children aged 15–17 years had the highest crude drowning rate (2.11 per 100,000 persons) | |
Season | Summer | Compared to winter, the highest risk of drowning was in the summer (RR = 12.45) | |
Işın and Peden (2022) [10] | Gender | Male | Males significantly more likely to drown than females (p < 0.001) |
Age | 65 + years | Aged 65 + years had the highest drowning rate (1.72 per 100,000 persons) | |
Işın et al. (2021) [34] | Season | Summera and Spring | Rescues more likely to be successful in Summer (p = 0.04) and less successful in Spring (p = 0.029) |
Activity | Swimminga and non-water related recreation | Rescues more likely to be successful when victim swimming (p = 0.001) and more likely to be unsuccessful when having a non-water related recreation (p = 0.032) | |
Location | Beach/seaa | Rescues more likely to be successful at beach/sea (p < 0.001) | |
Gender | Female | Females were significantly more likely to fatally drown while conducting a bystander rescue while having a picnic (X2 = 6.333; p = 0.023) | |
Gender | Male | Significantly higher risk of drowning while undertaking a bystander rescue for males | |
Age | 15–24-year-olds | 15–24-year-olds (but most age groups compared under 5 s) (RR: 82.21, CI: 11.44–590.56) | |
Şık et al. (2021) [44] | Vital signs | Predictors of hospital admission | A Szpilman score of ≥ 4 [ (OR) = 12.109, 95% CI: 2.327–63.010, p: 0.003], a lactate level of > 2 mmol/L (OR = 4.390, 95% CI: 1.365–14.121, p: 0.013), and pathologic CXR findings (OR = 19.500, 95% CI: 3.761–101.112, p < 0.001) were identified as predictors of hospital admissions |
Receipt of CPR | Predictors of hospital admission | Rate of patients who received CPR was higher in the group admitted to the hospital (p < 0.001) | |
Vital signs | Poorer outcomes | Evaluating the 8 patients with poor outcomes, they had lower body temperature (p: 0.015), Glasgow Coma Score (p < 0.001), pH (p: 0.012), and bicarbonate (p: 0.016) levels and higher Szpilman score (p < 0.001), AST (p: 0.009), ALT (p: 0.011), and lactate (p: 0.003) levels, with longer duration time of CPR (p: 0.03) | |
NIV treatment | Shorter stay in hospitala | Total length of stay in the PICU and in the hospital was shorter in patients who underwent NIV treatment (p: 0.026, p: 0.001) |