title: Why did persons invited to train in cardiopulmonary resuscitation not do so?
abstract: All citizens (N = 22066) aged 16 to 65 of a medium-sized Belgian town were personally invited to CPR training sessions held in their neighbourhood. 1152 responded by attending a training session. Those who did not so respond were surveyed (random sample N = 600) for reasons of their not coming. The sample fitted well with census data for gender, age and suburb location but not for job, because retired persons and women at home were overrepresented. 123 persons did not want to answer the questions. 116 persons said they were already trained in CPR, 276 said they would accept on a future occasion and 82 said they would not. Three persons did not answer this question. There was no discrimination for job, gender and suburb location between those who did not accept a future training opportunity, nor was the existence of a heart patient among relatives. The older the person, the less inclined was that person to participate in CPR training (age effect chi 2 = 17 X 17, d.f. = 9, P less than 0.05). The 276 who accepted future training, chose their workplace (221) and/or their social meeting place (club etc.) as the place where this future training should be held. We suggest that CPR training is well accepted and that the training opportunities should be given at places of work and social gatherings.
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001530:Belgium; D002755:Choice Behavior; D003256:Community Participation; D003159:Community-Institutional Relations; D005260:Female; D005392:First Aid; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D012151:Resuscitation / Q000193:education*; D014505:Urban Population