Retrospective survey

18 months following earthquake

Randomly selecting 1 in 3 households from region affected by the earthquake

93.6% of those extricated alive were rescued <24 hours after the earthquake

90% of people were extricated by inhabitants of the same village

18% of the population who had not died helped with rescue work

Case study

Immediately after earthquake

Inhabitants of 3 towns affected by earthquake

95% of people extricated who went on to have further medical care were extricated by local inhabitants using their hands or simple tools

89% of those rescued alive from collapsed buildings were extricated <24 hours, as were 93% of those who were trapped and survived

Structured retrospective interviews

Lay bystanders, medical providers, administrators, SAR personnel sampled from 3 different communities, different distances from epicentre

60% of live extrications were performed by relatives/neighbours

15% reported due to military and civil defence arriving within hours

25% not accounted for

Case control study

Hospitalised cases from city of Leninakan compared with controls not hospitalised in same neighbourhood

90% rescued by local inhabitants using their hands or simple tools

0.9% (2 people) rescued by international teams

Field survey of towns and villages affected

Interviews with survivors of earthquake and officials from Ministry of Health

85%–90% of those extricated alive from certain towns, rescued <48 hours after earthquake

Usually by untrained local inhabitants.

Random household survey of residents

Conducted in 2 out of 6 affected counties (San Francisco and Santa Cruz)

4.8% (11 500) citizens in Santa Cruz and 2.7% (20 000) in San Francisco engaged in SAR activity post earthquake

Unmatched case control study

At the time of relief activities (1–2 weeks post event)

Cases=people dead or alive who sustained injury due to earthquake (identified from hospital records/Department Social Welfare)

Controls=uninjured people in same neighbourhood at time of earthquake (uninjured family members of cases or those in refugee centres)

61% of cases were rescued by neighbours

84% of survivors were rescued <1 hour

99% rescued <48 hours

Retrospective structured interview study

Lay bystanders, SAR personnel, medical providers, disaster managers

Interviewees selected at random from sampling maps of area denoting locations of highest mortality/greatest building damage

Sample size was based on total population affected by earthquake in each particular village (2%–5%)

Most rescue efforts and transportation of casualties carried out by survivors themselves

Structured interviews using community health workers of all patients admitted to hospital immediately after earthquake

Within 4 hours of earthquake, local inhabitants had extricated practically all those trapped in collapsed structures

Reconnaissance study, using retrospective questionnaires

21% of survivors escaped on their own

31% were extricated by people in the same home

48% extricated by neighbours

All live rescues were reported to be completed by the time professional responders arrived

Retrospective questionnaire

People hospitalised following earthquake

Local and ISAR reportedly arrived at the scene >12 hours

Noted to have only minor impact on overall survival

Descriptive study

2 years after earthquake

Stratified 2 stage area sampling, to select 211 survivors who had been injured and received medical services

Surveyed on their opinions of medical response to earthquake

60.2% rescued by family and relatives

10.9% rescued by local people

0.5% rescued by the Red Crescent

0.5% rescued by military forces

28% unconscious at time of rescue, no recollection of who rescued them

Cross-sectional study

185 casualties who were hospitalised in first week post earthquake

Information from review of medical records and interviews with individuals

89.2% of first responders were relatives and local inhabitants